Bollywood
actor
Salman
Khan's
lawyer
Shrikant
Shivade
on
Thursday
questioned
how
the
actor's
Toyota
Land
Cruiser,
which
was
involved
in
the
accident
on
September
28,
2012
in
Bandra,
was
examined
in
flat
20
minutes
by
an
RTO
officer.
"Is
that
possible?
We
now
have
superfast
experts...
medical
and
blood
test
done
in
five
minutes,
vehicle
was
examined
in
20
minutes," Shivade
told
Additional
Sessions
Judge
D.W.
Deshpande
in
the
ongoing
final
arguments
in
the
retrial
of
the
accident
case.
The
defence
lawyer
pointed
out
how
RTO
official
R.S.
Keskar,
a
crucial
witness,
had
changed
his
statements
over
the
date
and
time
of
examining
the
vehicle.
"Once
the
witness
(Keskar)
said
he
examined
the
vehicle
on
September
28,
2002,
then
he
said
September
29,
2002...
He
is
a
liar
and
takes
recourse
to
lies
whenever
it
suits
him,"
Shivade
said.
Questioning
how
the
vehicle
was
examined
in
20
minutes,
Shivade
said
it
takes
5-7
minutes
to
check
the
steering,
2-4
minutes
for
the
brakes,
one-and-half
minutes
for
the
tyres,
4-5
minutes
to
check
the
gear
box,
10
minutes
to
check
what
is
mentioned
in
proforma
Col
4,5,6,
then
3-4
minutes
to
check
what
is
mentioned
in
Col
7,
1-2
minutes
to
check
the
spring...
"All
this
amounts
to
over
30
minutes...
The
witness
checks
the
car
and
also
conducts
a
test
drive
of
half-km
during
the
morning
peak
hours,"
Shivade
said.
Moreover,
he
was
not
carrying
the
required
proforma
to
inspect
the
vehicles
and
another
official
Imtiyaz
helped
with
the
technical
details,
this
was
the
first
imported
car
that
he
had
examined
and
perhaps
the
last
since
during
training
he
(Keskar)
had
examined
a
Tata
Indica,
and
now
a
Toyota
Land
Cruiser
-
"It
is
like
a
Class
II
student
appearing
for
B.Sc,"
Shivade
said
sarcastically.
He
said
a
tyre
burst
had
caused
the
accident
that
morning,
killing
one
pavement
dweller
and
injuring
four
others
-
"Once
the
witness
says
the
tyres
were
deflated,
then
he
says
air
pressure
was
low
-
what
is
correct?
Our
version
is
correct,
it
was
a
tyre
burst,"
Shivade
argued.
Shivade
said
according
to
a
survey,
35
percent
of
all
accidents
were
caused
due
to
burst
tyres.
In
a
shocking
disclosure
supported
with
statements,
Shivade
asked
why
it
took
two
days
to
file
the
FIR
in
the
case
-
"The
RTO
official
said
till
Sunday
(September
29,
2002),
he
was
not
shown
the
FIR
and
was
informed
it
was
being
prepared
-
why
this
delay?"
The
defence
lawyer
also
raised
questions
on
the
"professional
competency"
of
a
chemical
analyst
D.
Balachander
and
the
manner
in
which
forensic
labs
function
in
India,
and
discrepancies
pertaining
to
the
blood
samples.
He
pointed
out
that
the
blood
samples
of
Salman
were
analysed
at
the
Forensic
Science
Laboratory,
Kalina,
which
neither
has
an
ISO
certification
nor
is
accredited
to
the
National
Board
of
Accreditation.
Shivade
argued
that
rules
were
violated
in
the
manner
in
which
the
test
was
conducted,
and
the
prosecution
has
failed
to
prove
that
the
accused
(Salman's)
blood
contained
alcohol
to
the
tune
of
62
mg
per
100
ml.
Blasting
Balachander,
Shivade
alleged
that
he
did
not
know
how
to
conduct
the
tests,
does
not
know
difference
between
quantitative
and
qualitative
analysis,
difference
between
isometric
and
idometric
tests.
"How
much
can
we
rely
on
him...
It
is
like
-
'I
scored
a
century,
but
I
don't
know
how
to
play,
I
don't
know
the
difference
between
a
bat
and
a
ball',"
Shivade
said,
submitting
copies
of
Maharashtra
Medical
Code
and
Civil
Medical
Code
to
Judge
Deshpande.