May 08--REPORTING FROM MUMBAI, India -- Two days after being convicted for running over and killing a homeless man with his car, Bollywood superstar Salman Khan was freed on bail Friday in a case that has raised questions about special treatment for India's celebrities.
Khan, 49, was sentenced to five years' imprisonment but was spared jail time for now while a court decides on his appeal.
Hundreds of fans of the star, among India's top-grossing actors over the last decade, rallied outside his apartment and near the Bombay High Court and cheered when the decision was announced. One obsessed fan reportedly ingested poison outside the court building while Khan's appeal was being heard but survived, according to news reports.
Khan was convicted of culpable homicide, a lesser charge than murder, in a 2002 hit-and-run case when his Toyota LandCruiser ran over five homeless people sleeping on the pavement in an upmarket section of Mumbai, the capital of India's film industry known as Bollywood. One person was killed and four others injured.
While the homicide case dragged on for more than a decade, it took only two days for the appellate court to grant Khan's bail application. Having posted the roughly $470 bail, he will be allowed to continue making movies -- he's currently shooting or connected to film projects worth $31 million -- and will be able to travel abroad with the court's permission.
In sharp contrast to one of India's most famous men, a report in the Times of India on Friday said that two-thirds out of 381,000 prisoners in Indian jails are awaiting trials and have not been convicted. Many are poor and cannot afford to post bail, the newspaper said.
The next hearing in Khan's case is scheduled for June 15.
Khan received less than the maximum 10-year sentence despite the lower court judge's finding that he had been drunk behind the wheel of the SUV at the time of the crash.
Justice A.M. Thipsay of the Bombay High Court said Khan was not considered likely to flee while his appeal was being decided.
Khan's lawyers have argued that his driver was behind the wheel of the car, a claim that the lower court judge dismissed. Thipsay said that although "there is sufficient evidence to indicate that the applicant was driving the vehicle, certainly a number of arguable points have been raised, which need consideration."
Parth M.N. is a special correspondent.
