The Gujarat high court famous that Shah Rukh Khan was selling his film on the railway station, after having obtained permission to take action from the authorities involved.
AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat high court on Wednesday quashed a petition against Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan that was filed in 2017 in reference to a stampede at Vadodara railway station throughout the promotion of his movie ‘Raees’ in which one particular person died and several other others had been injured and fell unconscious.
“The petitioner was promoting his movie on the railway station, after having obtained permission to do so from the authorities concerned. Neither could the acts of the petitioner be termed as being of extreme high degree of negligence or recklessness nor could the acts stated to be proximate or efficient cause for the alleged incident,” the court mentioned in an oral order.
The alleged incidents occurred on account of fruits of many causes of which one of many causes might have been the act on a part of the petitioner of getting thrown ‘smiley balls’ and ‘T shirts’ in the gang, it mentioned.
That as famous hereinabove, out of 1000’s of individuals current in the Railway Station on the date of the incident together with police personnel and railway workers, not one of the individuals who may need been injured on account of the incident and even witnessed the incident had complained about the identical, it added.
The court additionally famous in its order that the petition has been filed by an individual who has no direct reference to the incident in question.
Following the stampede of 2017, Congress chief Jitendra Solanki filed a criticism against the actor. An area court in Vadodara issued summons to the movie star asking him to stay current. Shah Rukh Khan moved the high court against the summons and for quashing the criticism.
“This court is also required to consider that whether it would be fair and justifiable for ordinary citizens of the place, where the trial against the petitioner might be held if the impugned complaint is not quashed, who would have to suffer inconvenience on account of the petitioner being required to attend the trial with regard to a complaint, which has been filed by a person who has no direct connection with the incident in question,” the court order mentioned.
Trending Topics to Follow