Black Buck case

[wannabe]

Sorry to be blunt, but it's India. Anything is possible.

You may not have meant it this way, but what I find irritating about that kind of statement is that it's taken as a carte blanche for accepting any statement without support or verification, rather than examining each case on its own merits.  And also that when "anything is possible", that also means that the right thing can happen sometimes.

As for the black buck case, all I'm saying is that the people who want to protect the animals from poaching, and were looking for a case with major publicity value to bring attention to their cause, sure went about it in a very sloppy way.

[tabula rasa]

Sorry to be blunt, but it's India. Anything is possible.

You may not have meant it this way, but what I find irritating about that kind of statement is that it's taken as a carte blanche for accepting any statement without support or verification, rather than examining each case on its own merits.

As for the black buck case, all I'm saying is that the people who want to protect the animals from poaching, and were looking for a case with major publicity value to bring attention to their cause, sure went about it in a very sloppy way.

No I didn't mean it that way, though yes I kinda suspected you'd be irritated. Not my intention though. I just cannot be bothered to write reams about this, especially with so much divided opinions when it comes to this person in general and this issue in particular.

And sure, your reasoning might very well be the accurate one, I don't deny that.

[wannabe]

My irritation wasn't with you, sree.  See the edit I made to my post to see what I mean.  I guess you replied before I got that in.  (Why do I feel like Type 40 all of a sudden?   )

[lena]

Sorry to be blunt, but it's India. Anything is possible.

You may not have meant it this way, but what I find irritating about that kind of statement is that it's taken as a carte blanche for accepting any statement without support or verification, rather than examining each case on its own merits.  And also that when "anything is possible", that also means that the right thing can happen sometimes.

As for the black buck case, all I'm saying is that the people who want to protect the animals from poaching, and were looking for a case with major publicity value to bring attention to their cause, sure went about it in a very sloppy way.

While my knowledge of the Indian legal system is completely based on its representations in movies and therefore highly, highly tenuous, I do know that in the US, there can be a considerable time between the commission of the offense and actual charges being laid, simply because the police are still investigating the incident to determine whether a crime has been committed and whether it's worth filing the charges (ie, whatever they may suspect or even know to have happened, do they have witnesses, do they have the right kind of evidence, to successfully prosecute). So a gap of 2 years between the incident and the filing of charges is not necessarily a sign of sloppiness--if anything, it is usually a sign of carefulness--although it can also be a sign of pressure being brought to bear by the local community, and here I have heard of cases in the US and UK where this has happened, so I'm not saying "Oh, that's India."

[wannabe]

Salman's petition hearing on April 5

Jodhpur, April 4. (UNI): A local court has fixed April 5 for hearing a petition filed by actor Salman Khan against the charges framed by the judicial magistrate court on Feb 27, 2006 in the infamous black buck poaching case.

Jodhpur district and Sessions court magistrate Gordhansingh Surana yesterday transferred the petitions of Salman Khan and actresses Tabu and Sonali Bendre to Upper District and Session court (No.3) as its magistrate Pankaj Bhandari had already admitted petitions filed by actor Saif Ali Khan and Neelam on April 1.

The court had fixed April 3 for hearing the petitions filed by defence council Hastimal Sarawat, but as the case records are maintained at the Upper District and Sessions Court, it decided that the hearing of all petitions should be held there.

The actors have been accused of killing two black bucks in Kankani village in Luni district in October 1998. When they were shooting for the film 'Hum Saath Saath Hain'.

Actresses Tabu, Sonali and Neelam were said to be present during the hunting expedition. The case will come up for hearing on April 5 and 7 at the court of judicial magistrate Dalpat Singh Rajpurohit. But since the case records are maintained at the Upper District Court, there is a liklihood of new dates being announced.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/009200604041511.htm

[wannabe]

 Court admits Salman petition challenging framing of charges

Jodhpur, Apr 05: Bollywood stars Salman Khan, Tabu and Sonali Bendre today got a respite as a court here admitted their criminal revision petition challenging the framing of charges in a Chinkara poaching case in 1998 and issued notices to the Rajasthan government and a forest department official.

The Additional District and Sessions court issued notices to the Government of Rajasthan and a former Assistant Wildlife Conservator of the Forest Department and fixed April 22 for the next hearing when a revision petition for actors Saif Ali Khan and Neelam would also be presented.

The lawyer representing the actors Hastimal Sarswat argued that the charges were framed without considering the witnesses and material on record after which the court ordered admission of the petition and issued the notices.

Hastimal told the court there were no signatures of witnesses like Mangilal and Sheraram on the FIR, which was allegedly tampered and delayed.

The petition was filed against the order of the Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, who framed charges against Salman Khan under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Wildlife Protection Act and the Indian Arms Act.

It was initially filed in the court of District and Sessions Judge B S Surana who transferred the it to ADJ's court on Monday.

The case relates to hunting of two Chinkara deer at Kankani village in 1998 during the shooting of the film 'Hum Saath Saath Hain'.

Bureau Report

zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=286466&sid=REG

[mrs. k]

I  never saw Salman kill blackbuck: witness

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/15012.php/I_never_saw_Salman_kill_blackbuck:_witness

April 06, 2006

By Indo Asian News Service

Jodhpur, April 6 (IANS) Harish Dulani, the main witness in the blackbuck poaching involving actor Salman Khan has retracted his earlier statements and said that he had never seen the star killing the endangered animals.

Dulani told a TV channel that his earlier statements against Salman had been forcefully obtained by the police and forest department officials, who cowed him into making them.

Dulani and his family had gone underground for about four years from Jodhpur and the court hearing the poaching case issued a warrant against him when he failed to appear before it.

According to his earlier statements, he was the only eyewitness in the poaching case as he had been the driver of Salman's vehicle when the star was shooting for the film 'Hum Sath Sath Hain' at Jodhpur, also the time when the blackbuck was poached.

According to Dulani, he fled to Ahmedabad as he feared the police might harm him during their investigations of the case.

Dulani said that though he drove Salman during the shooting of the film, he never took the actor on a hunt.

He said he had been in Jodhpur for the past eight months and by Friday, he would appear before the court to tell the truth.

On Jan 24, 2002, Dulani made his statement against Salman in a court in Jodhpur. But before the next hearing Feb 20, 2002, Dulani disappeared.

[wannabe]

Thanks for posting that, mrs. k.  Apparently Dulani was interviewed on Zee news yesterday, where he made those statements.  Anyone here watch Zee News?

[wannabe]

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14179934

Salman's plea rejected in poaching case

Friday, 07 April , 2006, 22:10

Jodhpur: A court here on Friday rejected an application, filed by cine star Salman Khan, to summon a key witness in a poaching case in which he was an accused.

Chief Judicial Magistrate Brijendra Kumar Jain dismissed the application saying since arguments in the case had been over, there was no ground to entertain the petition.

The court will deliver the judgment in the case on April 10.

The application sought summoning of witness Harish Dulani, absconding for the past four years, after a TV channel telecast his interview last Wednesday in which he retracted from his earlier statement.

He said in the interview that he had never seen Salman killing the black buck, adding he had given his earlier statement under pressure from police and forest department officials.

Salman's counsel argued the court had not yet given the judgment and it could summon any witness at this stage in the interest of justice.

A poaching case was registered in 1988 against Salman Khan and others under the Wildlife Protection Act and the Indian Arms Act.


http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/mmpaper.asp?sectid=4&articleid=4720062348964047200623474625

   

E-mail this article
   Rate this article
Search archive    Comment

Print this article
   View Comments



Salman Khan


‘I did not see Salman killing black buck’

Driver and key witness Harish Dulani resurfaces, and retracts earlier statement

P B Chandra

Jodhpur: Harish Dulani, the key witnesses in the black buck poaching case, resurfaced out of the blue on Wednesday to give Salman Khan a clean chit before a TV crew. He then disappeared again.

Dulani and his family had vanished from Jodhpur about four years ago, after the former gave statements against the star in court. On Wednesday, however, he reappeared to tell a television crew in an interview that his earlier statements indicting Khan “had been forcefully obtained by the police and forest department officials”.

Dulani was driving Khan and other actors in his Gypsy on the night of September 28, 1998, when they allegedly shot down endangered black bucks.

Between January and March 2002, Dulani had twice testified before a court that Salman shot down black bucks and used the Gypsy to lug the dead animals to Jodhpur.

The timing of Dulani’s reappearance is significant since a judgement by a Jodhpur court in the case was expected on April 10. Legal experts told this reporter that Dulani’s retraction could pave way for Khan’s exoneration.

Last year, when Dulani did not appear before the court, an arrest warrant had been issued against him, but the warrant eventually expired. Ravi Prakash Meharda, Superintendent of Police (Crime), Jodhpur, said, Dulani, now, cannot be arrested unless a fresh warrant is issued against him.

It seems Dulani wants to retract his statement before the courts. Legal eyes say, what remains to be seen is whether the court treats Dulani as a hostile witness, or give credence to his new version.

[mrs. k]

Salman Fans Perform ´Yagya´/´Yajna´ In View Of Court Verdict Today
By: Abid

http://www.planetbollywood.com/displayArticle.php?id=040906114838

Thousands of fans of Salman Khan performed a 'Yagya' ( a Hindu ritual of burning wood with 'ghee' for fulfillment of all desires) in Meerut district of Uttar Pradesh . Unable to bear the pain of their favourite Bollywood filmstar falling into troubles one after another, hundreds of Salman Khan fans in Bahadurpur near Meerut, attended a 'Yajna' to make the filmstar's life trouble free, last Saturday.

Chief judicial magistrate of Jodhpur B.K. Jain had on Friday rejected Salman Khan's plea to summon key witness Harish Dulani in court for his deposition in the black buck poaching case .

Justifying his stand judge Jain categorily said that since the judgement of the court would be delivered on April 10 , at the present stage summoning Dulani would not help the cause of the litigation .

As may be recalled , Dulani had been missing for the past four years . Court summons could not be delivered to him as his whereabouts were not known . Last week he suddenly made a public appearance and told a television news channel that he did not see Salman shoot any animal .

The verdict in the case is to be delivered today (April 10) and the non-summoning and re-examination of the key witness Dulani , on whose 2001 statement the verdict of the case rests , makes the outcome obvious and a formality , even to the laymen .   

[wannabe]

Chinkara case: Salman found guilty

Jaipur, Apr 10: A local court has found Salman Khan guilty of killing a chinkara in 1988 at Ghora farmhouse. Goverdhan Singh, who accompanied Salman was also found guilty. The court is to pronounce the sentence later in the day.

The chief judicial magistrate court of Jodhpur Justice B K Jain who heard the defence counsel`s argument on March 28.

The case is related to 1988 when a Chinkara (deer species) was killed allegedly by Salman and other accused at Ghora farmhouse.

Last week on April 7, the CJM rejected Salman`s application for summoning a witness Harish Dulani who was missing from the court appearances for many years, Saraswat said.

Dulani was said to be the main witness in the poaching case, and reportedly retracted his earlier statement that he had seen Salman killing the animal. Following Dulani`s statement to TV news channel, Salman`s counsel Sarswat has moved the application in the CJM court seeking Dulani`s fresh statement which the court rejected.

Bureau Report

zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=287283&sid=NAT

[filmcrazy]

Hey everyone!

I just saw the news and Salman has been sentenced to prison for 5 years. 

[Zosia]

OMG!!! This is harsh for just killing a deer!?

[jhana]

'Five years' for Bollywood star

Bollywood star Salman Khan has been sentenced to five years in prison for poaching rare antelope.

The judge in Jodhpur in India's western Rajasthan state also fined Khan 25,000 rupees ($550). An accomplice was given one year in jail.

Khan, who was in court to hear the verdict, has always denied wrong-doing.

He was sentenced to a year in prison in February in an earlier poaching case, but has remained out of custody while he appeals against the verdict.

As camera flashbulbs went off, a visibly shaken Khan was bundled into a police van and taken to Jodphur Central Jail.

His lawyers say he will appeal against the verdict.

"We will file an appeal on Wednesday," Khan's lawyer, Hastimal Saraswat, said.

"I believe our case is strong on merit," he added.

Welcomed

But the verdict has been welcomed by the local Bishnoi community, which worships the black buck, a protected antelope species, and pressed charges against Khan.

"Now no one can dare to kill innocent animals," Mahipal Bishnoi, the lawyer representing the community, said.

Khan, 40, who has a reputation for reckless behaviour, is one of Bollywood's top actors.

He faces two other court cases relating to a hunting trip in Jodhpur in 1998, when two black bucks were killed.

Last week a court rejected his application to summon a key witness who he claims retracted earlier statements that he had seen Khan killing one of the black bucks.

Several other leading actors have also been charged, including actor Saif Ali Khan and actresses Tabu, Neelam and Sonali Bendre, who are accused of accompanying Salman Khan on the illegal hunting trip.

All have denied wrong-doing and said they will contest the charges.

[veracious]

I don't know what to think, really. I try to remain objective and I actually feel like calling a friend or something and presenting them the situation and then asking what sort of a sentence they feel like the person would deserve and see what they would answer.

Five years feels like too much but I don't know, how much do they usually give in these kind of cases? I thought a year of imprisonment would be enough.. Five years feels like the kind of sentence you give to a person who's killed another person. Then again, I'm an animal lover and think it's a pretty horrible act to kill an endangered animal unnecessarily.

It's just.. I don't know. Five years? It seems like a forever. And he's not even done with all the charges? Good grief.

[Sammy]

  This is so sad, five years for killing an animal and here in south africa it happens everyday and no one gets caught.
This is horrible

[palacerani]

I think it is severe in this case (just speculating, I'm no lawyer) because the animal concerned is an endagered species and also a revered one by the Bishnoi tribes.

[mrs. k]

Well, if he was really guilty and five years is within in the range of possible punishment, then its harsh, but its legal.

But in this case, the main witness -  the witness on which the prosecution based its entire case - has retracted his statement and in fact has accused the police and forest officials of coercing his testimony - and the judge wouldn't allow him to be re-examined or for him to make his statement in court, which he seems willing to do   And then the judge gives Salman a sentence where he has to stay in jail until he appeals? 

What the heck is that all about?     

[palacerani]

Salman sentenced to 5 years RI and jailed!
INDIATIMES MOVIES


Eight years after the black buck poaching incident, actor Salman Khan was on Monday sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment by a Chief Judicial Magistrate.
 
Salman, along with the watchman of the Ghora farmhouse in Jodhpur, was found guilty while four other accused were acquitted including actor Satish Shah.
 
Salman's plea for summoning yet another witness, Harish Dulani, was rejected by the CJM last week. Dulani has been missing from court appearances and is said to be the main witness but is reported to have retracted his earlier statement of having seen Salman killing the black buck.

Incidentally, the same court had earlier sentenced Salman to one year's imprisonment on February 17 for killing an endangered animal, but the actor was allowed to file an appeal on the same. Salman has been sent to Jodhpur Central Jail after the sentence was meted out.

http://movies.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1484824,curpg-1.cms

[palacerani]

Well, if he was really guilty and five years is within in the range of possible punishment, then its harsh, but its legal.

But in this case, the main witness -  the witness on which the prosecution based its entire case - has retracted his statement and in fact has accused the police and forest officials of coercing his testimony - and the judge wouldn't allow him to be re-examined or for him to make his statement in court, which he seems willing to do   And then the judge gives Salman a sentence where he has to stay in jail until he appeals? 

What the heck is that all about?     

I find this whole witness statement suspicious. First he says Salman did it and he saw Salman shooting the buck, now he retracts his statement and says the police forced him to accuse Salman. Now why would the police want Salman accused? They have nothing against him. 

[mrs. k]

Yeah, I kind of felt that way too about the police earlier - why should they care about whether or not Salman is guilty or not?   But  there may have been pressure from whatever groups - political or religious - to make an example of this case.  And frankly, maybe he was out poaching like countless others before and after him - but the point is, if the witness for the prosecution is making this accusation about coersion and wants to retract his statement, then shouldn't he be at least given the opportunity to do so in court?  Does everything have to work in the prosecution's favor?  and any evidence in support of the defense suppressed?

 

[palacerani]

Yeah, I kind of felt that way too about the police earlier - why should they care about whether or not Salman is guilty or not?   But  there may have been pressure from whatever groups - political or religious - to make an example of this case.  And frankly, maybe he was out poaching like countless others before and after him - but the point is, if the witness for the prosecution is making this accusation about coersion and wants to retract his statement, then shouldn't he be at least given the opportunity to do so in court?  Does everything have to work in the prosecution's favor?  and any evidence in support of the defense suppressed?

 

If he perjured himself earlier maybe he cannot be considered a credible witness? I don't know. The judge must have some basis for not allowing the testimony. He can't get away with doing what he wants to, India's not that bad.

[mrs. k]

Yeah, I kind of felt that way too about the police earlier - why should they care about whether or not Salman is guilty or not?   But  there may have been pressure from whatever groups - political or religious - to make an example of this case.  And frankly, maybe he was out poaching like countless others before and after him - but the point is, if the witness for the prosecution is making this accusation about coersion and wants to retract his statement, then shouldn't he be at least given the opportunity to do so in court?  Does everything have to work in the prosecution's favor?  and any evidence in support of the defense suppressed?

 

If he perjured himself earlier maybe he cannot be considered a credible witness? I don't know. The judge must have some basis for not allowing the testimony. He can't get away with doing what he wants to, India's not that bad.

Then why is he a credible witness for the prosecution?

 
I think it was at the judge's discretion to allow for  his testimony and retraction.  I suppose his reasoning (excuse) was that it was too late in the process to allow more evidence - though he could just as easily reopened the case I suppose.

But maybe there were other factors influencing his decision beyond the evidence of the case...

[palacerani]

Then why is he a credible witness for the prosecution?

Good question.

[guruduttfan]

5 years RI  seems excessive , endangered species or not..


wonder if salmans lawyer brought up the point that he was unaware he was poaching an endangered species?