The Bombay High Court dismissed criminal proceedings against Bollywood actor Salman Khan after a journalist filed a complaint alleging criminal intimidation. In its ruling, the court emphasized that the legal system should not be misused to harass a celebrity solely because of their public profile.
Justice Bharati Dangre expressed the view that celebrities should not face unnecessary persecution and oppression. The court’s decision is a clear indication of the need for fair treatment of all individuals, irrespective of their social status.
“The judicial process need not be a means for needless harassment merely because the Accused is a well-known celebrity and without adhering to the procedure of law, he shall not be subjected to unnecessary oppression at the hands of a complainant, who set in the machinery into motion to satisfy his vendetta and assumed that he was insulted by the cine star,” the judgment stated.
Salman Khan and his bodyguard had challenged a summons issued by a magistrate in response to a complaint filed by a journalist. The complaint alleged that Khan had unleashed his bodyguards on the journalist and cameraman, who were filming the actor as he rode a bicycle on the streets of Mumbai. The journalist claimed that Khan had even confiscated his phone and deleted its contents.
The magistrate found evidence supporting the complaint, including a positive police report under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Based on this, the magistrate ordered Khan to personally appear in court to face charges of intentional insult and criminal intimidation under Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
However, in April 2022, the High Court stayed the magistrate’s order, and Khan subsequently sought dismissal of the complaint against him.
Justice Bharati Dangre, before accepting the complaint, observed that the magistrate had failed to comply with the procedural mandate laid out in the Criminal Procedure Code.
The judge also noted that the invocation of Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC was inconsistent with the available evidence. Justice Dangre’s decision reflects the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to legal requirements in criminal proceedings.
“The words uttered in despair or a gesture, however frightful, by itself would not attract Section 504. The allegations against Khan in the complaint, apart from being an afterthought, in no case met the necessary ingredients of Sections 504 and 506, which would have warranted the Magistrate to take cognizance upon a complaint,” the Court observed.
The judge then ruled that the issuance of process against Khan and continuation of proceedings against him would be “nothing short of an abuse of process.”
