The prosecution had completed its arguments yesterday. It had said Section 304, Part-I (causing death intentionally) should be invoked against Sanjeev Nanda, Manik Kapoor and Siddhartha Gupta. As for Siddharta's father Rajiv Gupta and his employees, the prosecution said they should be charged with destroying evidence and harbouring an offender.

Defence counsel Anand, who represents Sanjeev Nanda, today said that his client be charged under Section 304 A (rash and negligent driving).

He claimed the prosecution case was ``improbable''. According to him, there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses.

Anand read out the statement of star witness Sunil Kulkarni, who gave his version to the police on two different occasions. Anand said that, Kulkarni had not told the police about two persons being thrown on the bonnet in his first statement. ``He was tutored and told to give a different statement to the police which he did later,'' Anand said in court.

Anand also objected to the statement of Harishankar, the petrol pump employer. Shankar, according to Anand, is a complainant and cannot be listed as a witness. ``He had informed his employer about the incident, who later called the police. How can he become an eye-witness?'' Anand asked.

The statement given by Manoj, the lone survivor of the accident, to the police did not corroborate Kulkarni's version. ``Manoj has nowhere talked about the two persons who had fallen on the bonnet of the car after the impact, a stand which Kulkarni has taken in his statement,'' said Anand.