Est. 1964 · Mumbai1964 – 2025 · every issue, digitised
Parsiana
The global Zoroastrian link medium
Events & Personalities

A more serious charge

Four years after the incident, the Bombay Sessions Court said on October 21, 2008 that film director Kaizad Gustad will be tried for culpable homicide not amounting to murder in connection with the death of his assistant, 27-year-old British national Nadia Khan, reported Mumbai Mirror (MM) on October 22, 2008. The directive came as a jolt to Gustad, who had filed a revision petition in the Sessions Court early this year to change his plea to death by negligence. The more serious offence is punishable with up to 10 years’ imprisonment, while the latter attracts a much lesser punishment.



Film director Kaizad Gustad


Gustad was booked for the death of Khan after she was hit by a train near Mahalaxmi station on May 25, 2004 during the shooting of Bombay Central. Initially, Gustad and his crew claimed that Khan died in a road mishap, but a probe allegedly showed that a fake panchnama had been prepared and that Khan had been reportedly run over by a train, The Times of India (TOI) on October 22, 2008 recalled. In December 2007 a railway magistrate’s court enhanced the charges against Gustad from causing death by negligence to culpable homicide.
During the trial in the magistrate’s court 31 of the 33 witnesses turned hostile and Gustad’s lawyer charged the two main complainants, Shankar Raman and Vinod Subramanian, with perjury, the newspapers reported. The latter, however, reportedly deposed that the crew had permission to shoot only on a "dead track” where trains did not ply but Khan was posted near a "live” track despite the crew not having permission to shoot there, TOI wrote.
Counsel for Gustad, Junaid Shab-wany, said that the defence may move a fresh plea seeking the director’s discharge on the culpable homicide charge. Opposing Gustad’s plea in the Sessions Court, Khan’s father Mohammad Nazir had filed an intervening application. The Sessions Court agreed with Nazir’s advocate, Yug Chowdhry, who argued: "The evidence recorded in this case shows that the accused initially told police authorities that the deceased was killed by an unknown car driver on Mahalaxmi bridge in a hit and run accident… The evidence shows that he then gave instructions to his staff members to lie to the police,” MM reports.
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive