NEWS

Salman Khan Goes To Jail - To Set An Example?

April 11, 2006
Mayank Austen Soofi

Salman Khan has been arrested. If he fails to get a bail, he will be spending five years of his life in the Central Jail of Udaipur, a high-security prison that specializes in housing dreaded terrorists from Kashmir.

According to reports, Salman Khan's mobile phone was seized before he was locked in a solitary cell in the Jail. His first meal in the prison consisted of potato curry and few rotis; while water was provided in an earthern pot.

Udaipur lies right in the heart of the desert region of Rajasthan and the mercury is soaring above 40 degrees outside Salman's non-air-conditioned prison. It must be very hot in the cell where by the way he has not been provided with a bed. The jail authorities though have permitted him to use his own clothes for hygiene purpose.

Meanwhile in Mumbai television cameras followed Salma Khan, filmstar's shaken mother complaining of chest pains, as she was taken to Lilavati hospital on a stretcher in a true Bollywood style resembling melodramatic plots of Salim-Javed scripts. Whether Madam Khan is seriously ill or is it a ploy by the family to win some public sympathy is not clear.

Salman was convicted of poaching endangered Indian gazelles in 1998 while shooting for the Rajshri family drama Hum Saath Saath Hain in Rajasthan.

This present penalty falls rather in sequence in the actor's disgraced biography which is littered with earlier misdeeds including charges of manslaughter when he reportedly drove over a Mumbai pavement dweller, an immigrant from Eastern UP, in a drunken state in 2002.

Salman Khan has also been known for allegedly abusing and beating his girl friends; he was believed to be the culprit behind his then lover Aishwarya Rai's fractured arm that was publicly on display in a cast when she climbed the stage to accept a Filmfare Award in 2000.

Only last week the film star was spotted gawking at the models in the front benches of a Mumbai fashion show. Recently in news for his balding head, the fans of the aging hulk were relieved to see him with his new transplanted hair.

In the Udaipur court minutes before the present verdict, Salman, looking handsome and confident in a baseball cap, white cotton shirt and blue denim, was heard assuring his friend , "Relax yaar, tension mat lo. I'll be back." But the trademark swagger and arrogance swiftly turned pale after the judge pronounced his sentence of a 5-years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 25,000.

In the history of environmental laws, this is one of the few instances where a strong punishment has been awarded for killing an endangered animal. The Wildlife Protection Act provides for a sentence up to seven years and a fine up to Rs. 25,000 for killing endangered animals such as black buck, gazelle, antelope and chinkara, which are protected under Schedule I of the Statute. Such harsh punishment is normally given to habitual poachers and illegal traders in elephant tusks and tiger skins.

Immediately following the verdict, Rajasthan Forest and Environment Minister Laxminarain Dave hailed the judgment as ``victory of justice'' while NDTV India news channel ran a special feature the same evening titled 'Maine Shikar Kyun Kiya'. Other news channels too used similar catchlines.

Interestingly actors Saif Ali Khan, Neelam, Tabu and Sonali Bendre are co-accused in one of the four poaching cases registered against Salman Khan, in which the final judgment is yet to be delivered while comedian Satish Shah has already been acquitted.

Delivering his judgment, Chief Judicial Magistrate Brijendra Kumar Jain showed no hint of being overawed by the star, saying that people with profiles shouldn't be allowed to set bad examples. "He is a hero with a large following, therefore he must present a good example," he said.

It is this statement by the honorable justice that cast a doubt if the judgment had been shaded with a prejudice against Khan. Does it imply if he was not a 'hero with a large following', he could have got away with a much milder sentence?

The verdict if it somehow assures right thinking people in the inevitability of justice that can not be corrupted by the might of the accused still retains a capability of unsettling the mind about the uncertainty of its even handedness: that why does such example-settings sentences have still not been delivered to those politicians who led mobs that killed thousands of Sikhs in 1984 or to those mass leaders who were directly or indirectly responsible for the killing of Muslims in Gujarat after the Godhra attack on Karsevaks.

Is it that the high visibility but essentially the powerlessness of film stars makes them a soft and comfortable target for setting examples? Do the courts run short of courage when it comes to power politicians?

Why are no examples set in their cases? Can Sajjan Kumar or Jagdish Tytler be ever sent behind bars for their questionable conduct in Sikh riots? Can L K Advani be ever jailed for inciting riots by deliberately making inflammatory speeches against a particular religion in 1992? Can Sonia Gandhi be ever summoned to courts for explaining her role in assistance that her former family friend Ottavio Quattrocchi mysteriously seems to receive from Indian agencies now and then? Will any honorable justice sentence Natwar Singh and his son to 5-years rigorous imprisonment for their role in UN oil-for-food scandal?

Finally, is the Salman Khan sentence really an example of the infallibility of justice? Or is it mere eyewash?

Why has the Indian court system failed to deploy the same uncompromising standard for politicians 'with large or small followings'?

That is the question!

Mayank Austen Soofi owns a private library and four blogs: The Delhi Walla, Pakistan Paindabad, Ruined By Reading, and Mayank Austen Soofi Photos. Contact: mayankaustensoofi@gmail.com
eXTReMe Tracker
Keep reading for comments on this article and add some feedback of your own!

Comments! Feedback! Speak and be heard!

Comment on this article or leave feedback for the author

#1
Sakshi
URL
April 11, 2006
01:07 PM

Passing sentence, Judge Vijender Kumar said that the star had committed "a heinous crime" that merited a tariff of "rigorous imprisonment". But what about all the other pending cases of animal killings that are collecting dust, at the very court? Was the judge on some dope, for all the previous cases?

It's funny they say that 'Law should be equal for all' then why was Salman Khan given a harsher punishment....compared to previous rulings with respect to the same crime. Just because he is a movie star !! The whole purpose of the judgement is somewhere lost...just another mockery of our legal system.

#2
Kapil
URL
April 11, 2006
03:14 PM

Fully agree.Salman is as much as a victim of his star status as his bad boy image.But seriously ,the sentence in hysterical .More recently nawab Pataudi was apprehended for a similar misdemeanour and that too with evidence,but that has been brushed under the carper probably because of his clout or not having a Salman Khanisqe stature..
As for his mowing down people.Should't we be questioning why there were people sleeping on the pavement in the first place.Should'nt the local authorities be held guilty of allowing such enroachments on pavements.Yes ,Salman could be guilty of drunken driving,but morally the local authorities should be held accountable .

#3
Vikas Chowdhry
URL
April 11, 2006
07:05 PM

You've hit the nail on the head my friend! When all is said and done, it is the politicians who wield all the strings of power in India.

Not businessmen (look at Ambanis sweeping the floor at Amar Singh's place), not stars (look at Amitabh Bachchan following Ambanis at Amar Singh's), not entrepreneurs (look at the insults heaped on Narayan Murthy by Deve Gowda).

When I interviewed Paritrana's treasurer Chandrashekhar - he said as much. That after working in social sector for a few years they had come to realize that things can change in India only when responsible people start taking a role in active politics. And that is why they decided to get into politics.

#4
bevivek
URL
April 11, 2006
10:30 PM

Kapil - On pavement dwellers and sleepers - The supreme court issued its verdict in the Olga Tellis vs BMC in 1985. I quote from an article on this, "One of the first, and perhaps most important, housing rights cases to go up to the Supreme Court in India was the Olga Tellis case in 1985. This petition to the Bombay High Court was in the form of a PIL by thousands of pavement dwellers of Bombay city. The petitioners argued that they could not be evicted from their squalid shelters without being offered alternative acommodation ....... And although the final orders in Olga Tellis found that the pavement dwellers should be evicted, the Supreme Court also laid down that this could be done only after arranging alternative accommodation for them. In a sense, the Supreme Court was in fact upholding the right of the pavement dwellers to shelter."

So let us not transfer the blame of Salman's crime to the poor guy on the pavement who's not there by choice. But for the grace of God any of us could have been the guy who was run over by this drunk jerk.

It would be blind to ignore that Salman is more than teetering on the edge of criminality. This gazelle poaching is merely the latest in the long line of his over-the-edge acts. Maybe this sentence was harsh but I believe he stands a good chance of being out on bail by day after. 5 days in Jail, hmmm, not bad I think.

#5
Ashraf
April 12, 2006
05:27 AM

what happen to the second series on pakistan? the first was good.

#6
saif khalid
April 12, 2006
09:55 AM

Hi,
In the horde to slice up a pie of the sensational news (Here Salman's story), the media (Both versions) scrambled to get the breaking news and splash it on their front pages (or the first one to air in case of great electronic news bazar). But most of them missed the gist of the story. And there was an obvious stink of parochialness, biasness and clear lack of perspective. It's really pity that from among the dozen or so many (different?) news channels we get the same perspective, the same trivial questions related to Salman and the so called 'standard setting' role of the judiciary. There is an alarming danger in what we see a 'concensus' of opinions, news selection (and of course news deletion) in the media over various burning topics being faced by our country. The point I seek to emphasise is that it (samesness) does not bode well for the vibrancy and culture of questioning.
In this scenario, an opinion, which really gives a fresh perspective to the news, is enlightening. The court's shameful rulings be it on the narmada dam, hundreds of riot related cases and multitude pro-rich decisions (recent being the Jessica, Matto and Irfan case) in the past cannot be forgotten. The media should desist from projecting the judiciary as the saviour of the last resort and hope for the crumbling and corrupt Indian polity and bureaucracy. The judiciary has almost become unaccesible for the poor and high and mighty have walked away with whatever wrong they have committed.
Hope your piece will be able to ignite a healthy and vibrant debate on the role and functioning of judiciary.
I could have added few more points but due to paucity of time I cannot.
Once again, it is a wonderful piece with coherence prose and standard lexicon.
thnx
bye

Saif Khalid
HT.com

#7
Sudeep
URL
April 12, 2006
03:10 PM

All you guys are arguing not for Salman's punishment being too harsh, or him being punished unfairly - but for the authorities to deal out more of the same in other cases - Matoo, Lall etc - too.

Its a shame that judicial and prosecution standards have slipped so much that fair is now foul and foul is fair.

The govt machinary that acted in a superb manner this time around is blamed for acting so in this particular case when it failed to act in other cases. And Salman, a convicted criminal is now a poor scapegoat being punished unfairly for being a celebrity.

#8
Monica Singh
April 13, 2006
03:17 AM

I m fully agree with this article. We people are living in a democratic country then why these kinds of things are happening. For the same mistake one (Nawab Patodi) have to leave to laugh on todays law system and the other one(Salman Khan) get a hard punishment....!!! I think the law is erased by the law makers only. People says " Delay in Justice is Injustice" but i think now only the "justice is injustice"

#9
sameer momaya
April 13, 2006
05:05 AM

Sudeep -- well said....i fully agree with you..! Celebrity or no celebrity, the guilty being handed out a punishment promptly is a good example being set by the judiciary...Let us not start foolishly expecting an ideal world overnight....an ideal world in which all court cases will be disposed off in the shortest possible time and that every time the guilty would get the right punishment, no matter whether he/she is a politician, a film star, a businessman or just a common man....Come on guys let us not talk of the Akbar-Birbal days....Be practical....But I do agree that this is not enough and the judicial system in india needs a major overhaul so that cases are resolved with greater speed and accuracy...

#10
Kapil
URL
April 13, 2006
05:14 AM

be vivek ! what do you mean by "So let us not transfer the blame of Salman's crime to the poor guy on the pavement who's not there by choice."
You yourself are telling he was thr bcoz he was not provided with an alternate accomodation
Then from this argument one should deduce that BMC was at fault for not providing them wth accomodation.A bigger issue is tht 'WHY should BMC provide migrant labour with accomodation '?? We are not a socialist economy ?
This reminds of the BMW hit and run case .
I agree tht the getting mowed by a drunkard is not confined to those sleeping on pavements only.But are the authorities shirking there share of the blame .And honestly tell me .How many such drunkards are arrested and actually convicted in the first place??

I believe Salman won't be in jail for long .But this sentence meted out should knock some sense in his head .let him realize the consequences of his actions and hopefulls the chinkara's and Mumbai's streets would have one less person to worry about

#11
bevivek
URL
April 13, 2006
09:40 AM

Kapil - "let him realize the consequences of his actions and hopefully the chinkaras and Mumbai's streets would have one less person to worry about"

Amen, inshallah, etc etc

As we write, the jerk is back out on the streets with his half wit and violence intact.

Add your comment

(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/1376)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.






Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!