![]() Tuesday, Nov 18, 2003 |
| National | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | National
By Our Legal Correspondent
Mr. Ashwini Kumar said the actor was in a drunken state and had taken to the wheels despite his security guards warning him not to drive at the dead of the night in such a condition. The SLP stated that on October 6, a magistrate framed ten charges against the actor, a year after he killed one person and injured four by ramming his vehicle into a bakery. He pleaded not guilty to all the charges framed against him under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Motor Vehicles Act and the Bombay Prohibition Act. The Magistrate rejected the State's plea for staying the process of framing charges as it desired to prefer an appeal in the Supreme Court against an order of the High Court, which had dropped the charge of culpable homicide framed against the actor earlier. He said the State was free to move the apex court even after framing of charges. Assailing the High Court judgment, the SLP raised an important question of law on whether the offence allegedly committed by the actor fell within the scope of section 304 (2) IPC, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, which attracts ten years, or not. The SLP prayed for quashing the impugned judgment and stay of trial till then.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|