Abha Singh for punishment of Mumbai Police cops for 'shielding' Salman

Women rights activist Abha Singh on Tuesday lashed out at the Mumbai Police for 'shielding' and giving a 'free hand' to Bollywood actor Salman Khan in the 2002 hit-and-run case, demanding that the matter should once again be brought before the sessions court.

Singh alleged that there were loopholes in this case as the Mumbai Police wanted to help the actor.

"Now, just by accepting the loopholes, one cannot exonerate the Mumbai Police, who purposely derailed the case. They need to be arrested and punished. This case needs to be send back to the sessions' court so that Kamal Khan is brought back to India and his statement is recorded," Singh told ANI.

"We had filed a perjury case in Bandra court three years back, saying that Mumbai Police had purposely derailed the case and purposely not issuing summons to the witnesses. It was getting false doctors in the court. At that time, the police never came up to say yes we have committed mistakes," she added.

Singh further said the circular to all police stations highlighting the lapses and discrepancies in the 2002 hit-and-run case discloses the fact that it was a big conspiracy on the part of the men in uniform.

"The Supreme Court must take into cognizance these issues because somewhere the reputation of the judiciary has taken a bashing. People have lost their faith in the judiciary because Salman's judgment has clearly shown that you can browbeat the law with a battery of lawyers and with friendship with the police," she added.

The circular, issued by Additional Commissioner of Police (Crime) KMM Prasanna, has pointed out loopholes in the investigation - as mentioned by the judge while acquitting the actor - for officials to keep in mind in similar investigations in the future.

Array

A trail court in Mumbai had had issued summons tosinger Kamal Khan, but matters were not followed up further.

Salman Khan was on December 10 given a clean chit in the case with the Bombay High Court observing that the main witness was 'wholly unreliable' and that there were discrepancies in the case.