NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside the Rajasthan High Court order suspending the conviction of Bollywood actor Salman Khan in the black buck hunting case, which would bar him from travelling to foreign countries like the UK which had denied visa to him on this ground in past.
The High Court had provided Salman the relief after he had submitted that the conviction was coming in his way to travel abroad as authorities of the UK were denying him visa on the ground that he has been held guilty in a criminal case and a mere suspension of five years jail term and bail was of no help.
“If some foreign country is not granting permission to visit the said country on the ground that the respondent (Salman) has been convicted of an offence and has been sentenced for five years of imprisonment under the Indian law, the said order cannot be a ground to stay the order of conviction,” a Bench comprising Justice S J Mukhopadhyay and Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel, said.
While finding fault with November 12, 2013, verdict of the High Court, the Bench said “If an order of conviction in any manner is causing irreversible consequences or injustice to the respondent (Salman), it was open to the court to consider the same.”
“If the court comes to a definite conclusion that the irreversible consequences/injustice would cause to the accused which could not be restored, it was well within the domain of the court to stay the conviction. No such ground has been shown by the High Court while passing the impugned order. Further, we find that now more than a year has passed and there is nothing on record to suggest that the respondent has again to visit the UK for further shooting of any film/movie,” the Bench said.
While quashing the judgement and order of the Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, the apex court remitted the case back to the High Court to decide the matter afresh.
“It would be open to the respondent (Salman) to show that if the order of conviction is not stayed, it will cause irreversible consequences/ injustice to him which cannot be undone if he ultimately succeeds. It would be open to the state to oppose such prayer,” the Bench said.