HC stays summons to Salman Khan in intimidation case

The HC said that though the complaint had been lodged, there was no mention of any assault on the journalist and hence the summons by the magistrate was stayed

Mumbai In a relief to Salman Khan, the Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday stayed the summons issued to the actor and his bodyguard by the Andheri metropolitan magistrate in an alleged intimidation case registered at DN Nagar police station by a journalist in 2019.

The journalist in his complaint had claimed that he was provoked and also intimidated and the bodyguard had seized his mobile phone (HT PHOTO)

The HC said that though the complaint had been lodged, there was no mention of any assault on the journalist and hence the summons by the magistrate was stayed and posted hearing of the petition by Khan to May 5.

The single-judge bench of justice Revati Mohite Dere, while hearing the petition of Khan challenging the summons, was informed by senior advocate Aabad Ponda that the journalist had only been asked by the bodyguard to stop shooting Khan while he was cycling.

However, the journalist in his complaint had claimed that he was provoked and also intimidated and the bodyguard had seized his mobile phone. He added that after a heated argument, Khan also issued threats. Hence, cases under sections 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were registered against the duo.

Thereafter, the magistrate court sought a report from the DN Nagar police station where the complaint was filed.

Based on the report by the investigating officer pertaining to the complaint, the magistrate had issued proceedings against Khan and his bodyguard on March 23 and asked them to be personally present before it on April 5.

While seeking a stay on the summons, Ponda further reiterated that the day on which the journalist had lodged the complaint, he had not mentioned Khan’s name but the same was reflected later. Ponda stated Khan had only ordered his bodyguards to stop the journalist from shooting, hence, if there was any prosecution, it had to be against the bodyguards and not him.

However, advocate Ejaz Khan for the journalist claimed that his client was traumatised on the day of the incident and had forgotten to mention the name of the actor.

After hearing the arguments, the bench observed that had there been any assault, it would have been clearly and properly documented by the journalist in his complaint but that was not the case, as a result of which the summons was being stayed and further hearing of Khan’s petition was being posted to May 5.