2002 hit and run case: Doctor gives 2 versions on whether Salman was drunk

A doctor on Thursday told a local court hearing the hitandrun case allegedly involving superstar Salman Khan that the actor smelt of alcohol when he was brought for a blood test soon after the incident though during clinical examination the same day it appeared he was not under the influence of liquorThe patients Salman pupils were slightly dilatedspeech was coherent and walking steps were normal duringclinical examination Dr Shashikant Pawar told Special PublicProsecutor Pradeep Gharat in the courtAccording to police Khans car had rammed into aroadside shop in suburban Bandra killing one person andinjuring four people who were sleeping on pavement onSeptember 28 2002The actor was taken to Governmentrun J J Hospitalsoon after the mishap for necessary examination Pawar at thattime was attached to the hospitalTo a query Pawar said Khan was smelling of liquorwhen he was brought to him but during clinical examinationlater in the day he did not appear to be under the influenceof alcohol This was a preliminary finding and the report ofchemical analysis of the actors blood sample was awaitedHowever the Bollywood star had told him he had nottaken drinks Pawar who appeared as a prosecution witnesstold Sessions Judge D W DeshpandeHowever during crossexamination by Khans lawyerSrikant Shivade Pawar admitted he had not recorded in thecase papers prepared by him that Khan smelt of alcoholHe however could not assign any reason for notrecording this fact The doctor admitted that there were noclear guidelines by the Health Department regarding caseswhere blood test should be conductedPawar said he had taken Khans consent for the bloodtest but this had not been recorded in the case papers Headmitted the case papers did not bear the signature or thumbimpression of the actorAsked if it was necessary to take consent for blood testhe replied in the affirmativeTo a question the doctor said dilation of pupilscould be due to many reasons though consumption of alcoholcould be one of the factors One cannot conclusively say thatpupils were dilated due to consumption of alcoholFrom the case papers it cannot be said that the patientwas smelling of alcohol Pawar said in response to a queryfrom the defence lawyerAsked why the papers did not mention the wordalcohol the doctor could not give any reason He howeversaid it is possible that impression of this word could notappear in the carbon copy of the documentThe doctor said he had compared the entries of theEmergency Police Register and case papers verified andcertified their contents to be correctTo a question by Shivade Pawar however said itwould be incorrect to say the word alcohol was not in thepolice register or case papers and that it was later added byhim in the documentsThe crossexamination will continue on January 27A total of 21 witnesses have been examined and five tosix more remain to depose in the trial which has reached itstailendThe case dragging for over a decade had taken atwist when a city Magistrate after examining 17 witnessesheld that the charge of culpable homicide not amounting tomurder was made out against Khan and referred it to a sessionscourt the competent judicial authority for such mattersOn December 5 2013 the sessions court had ordered afresh trial on the ground that witnesses had not been examinedin the context of aggravated charge of culpable homicide whichwas invoked against the actor by the magisterial court midwaythrough the hearingThe charge of culpable homicide unintentional butillegal killing of someone attracts a 10year sentenceThe 49yearold actor had earlier been tried by amagistrate for a lesser offence of causing death bynegligence which entails imprisonment of two years