Sanjay Dutt should not be pardoned
The Supreme Court upholds the conviction of a person for illegal possession of an assault weapon, an AK-56 rifle, and sentences him to a 5 year jail term. The weapon is part of a larger consignment that will be used to carry out the deadliest terrorist attacks on that country’s financial capital. The convict has also met, hugged and had phone conversations with the masterminds of this terror conspiracy. These are men whose name repeatedly figure in the infamous “most wanted” lists. In the past he has also illegally possessed a pistol. Along with him, about 100 others are found guilty. But there is a powerful political and societal lobby that sympathizes with him and pushes for his pardon. Poor man, he just loved guns but also the Mahatma, they clamour in unison. Freedom for one. The rest can rot.
This in essence is the story of a convicted criminal named Sanjay Dutt. That he happens to be an actor in India’s powerful Hindi film industry called Bollywood, that his parents too were in the same profession and were honest and sincere social workers, that his father and sister were and are MPs, are all only incidental and secondary factors, of little importance.
But it is exactly this privilege: of being a part of an affluent, upscale, influential and yet an extremely insecure circle of society in a largely poor country, that allows facts to be blurred by emotional rhetoric. What’s even more tragic is that they know and the system knows: this can work wonders.
So let’s begin where it has all ended. With Justice Markandey Katju, the chairman of the Press Council of India. Can fictitious and popular characters played by film stars in movies ever have any bearing on an actor’s relationship with the law in real life? I never thought it could. But Justice Katju has got us thinking. After all, he believes that 90% of Indians are “idiots” who can easily be misled in the name of religion. But this goes beyond the circle of idiots. Now, he has forced K Sankarnarayanan, the Governor of Maharashtra to think too. And here’s how: hours after Dutt was given a 5 year prison term by the Supreme Court in the 1993 Bombay blasts case, Justice Katju penned an appeal requesting the governor to pardon Sanjay.
Ten reasons that need a rebuttal.
1) Sanjay has suffered a lot
2) He underwent various tribulations and indignities
3) He had to go to court often
So? Haven’t the other accused also suffered “a lot”? Ya, if you are accused of breaking the law, you have to go to court. That’s true for everybody. The legal system took 20 years to complete the trial, then all accused in this trial should get the benefit against their conviction. Shouldn’t they?
4) He had to take the permission of the Court for foreign shootings
5) He could not get bank loans
6) He has undergone 18 months in jail
Why should that be surprising? He was earning his livelihood when out on bail. And indeed, making a lot of money. 18 months: that’s just 30% of his 5 year jail time.
7) Sanjay Dutt is married and has two small children
Now here’s where it starts getting interesting. Sanjay married Manyata in 2008 after he was convicted by the TADA court a year earlier. Kids came in much later. No doubt, this ordeal is painful for the family for no fault of theirs. But Sanjay was aware that the final say in the matter was with the Supreme Court. He still chose to take that risk and go ahead with his domestic life. How can this be a mitigating factor to pardon him?
8) He has not been held to be a terrorist, and had no hand in the bomb blasts
Sure, but he is a convicted accused under a serious charge called the Arms Act. In fact, lawyers believe he should be convicted like the other accused under TADA. Because under TADA, at the point of time, possessing an illegal weapon in a notified area – which Mumbai was – automatically attracted the stringent act. Hence he was booked and tried for terror charges just like the others. Lawyers are surprised that he was let off by the courts on this count. It may be true that he didn’t know about the blast conspiracy, but then that was the case with many others too.
9) His parents Sunil Dutt and Nargis worked for the good of society and the nation. They often went to border areas to give moral support to our brave jawans and did other social work for society. Really? How can good karma of his parents, be passed on to mitigate Sanjay’s criminal past? Astrologically it is possible perhaps to access this benefit. But legally?
10) Sanjay in this period of 20 years has through his film revived the memory of Mahatma Gandhi and the message of Gandhiji, the father of the nation.
And here’s where it gets outrageous. Munnabhai is a fictitious filmi character. Sanjay did a great job, but the larger credit for the characterization goes to the director and screenplay writer. Sanjay also played shady roles of criminals in super hit films like Khalnayak and Vaastav. Should that then be taken against him? Certainly, not.The problem with Justice Katju’s appeal is that it is an emotional plea. Coming from a former justice of the Supreme Court, it is expected that beyond sentiments, the appeal should be legally sound.
In fact the power of a pardon is also subject to judicial review and it cannot be exercised whimsically. Critically, it has to be in public good. Alas, Bollywood support continues unabated.
The Supreme Court upholds the conviction of a person for illegal possession of an assault weapon, an AK-56 rifle, and sentences him to a 5 year jail term. The weapon is part of a larger consignment that will be used to carry out the deadliest terrorist attacks on that country’s financial capital....
The Supreme Court upholds the conviction of a person for illegal possession of an assault weapon, an AK-56 rifle, and sentences him to a 5 year jail term. The weapon is part of a larger consignment that will be used to carry out the deadliest terrorist attacks on that country’s financial capital. The convict has also met, hugged and had phone conversations with the masterminds of this terror conspiracy. These are men whose name repeatedly figure in the infamous “most wanted” lists. In the past he has also illegally possessed a pistol. Along with him, about 100 others are found guilty. But there is a powerful political and societal lobby that sympathizes with him and pushes for his pardon. Poor man, he just loved guns but also the Mahatma, they clamour in unison. Freedom for one. The rest can rot.
This in essence is the story of a convicted criminal named Sanjay Dutt. That he happens to be an actor in India’s powerful Hindi film industry called Bollywood, that his parents too were in the same profession and were honest and sincere social workers, that his father and sister were and are MPs, are all only incidental and secondary factors, of little importance.
But it is exactly this privilege: of being a part of an affluent, upscale, influential and yet an extremely insecure circle of society in a largely poor country, that allows facts to be blurred by emotional rhetoric. What’s even more tragic is that they know and the system knows: this can work wonders.
So let’s begin where it has all ended. With Justice Markandey Katju, the chairman of the Press Council of India. Can fictitious and popular characters played by film stars in movies ever have any bearing on an actor’s relationship with the law in real life? I never thought it could. But Justice Katju has got us thinking. After all, he believes that 90% of Indians are “idiots” who can easily be misled in the name of religion. But this goes beyond the circle of idiots. Now, he has forced K Sankarnarayanan, the Governor of Maharashtra to think too. And here’s how: hours after Dutt was given a 5 year prison term by the Supreme Court in the 1993 Bombay blasts case, Justice Katju penned an appeal requesting the governor to pardon Sanjay.
Ten reasons that need a rebuttal.
1) Sanjay has suffered a lot
2) He underwent various tribulations and indignities
3) He had to go to court often
So? Haven’t the other accused also suffered “a lot”? Ya, if you are accused of breaking the law, you have to go to court. That’s true for everybody. The legal system took 20 years to complete the trial, then all accused in this trial should get the benefit against their conviction. Shouldn’t they?
4) He had to take the permission of the Court for foreign shootings
5) He could not get bank loans
6) He has undergone 18 months in jail
Why should that be surprising? He was earning his livelihood when out on bail. And indeed, making a lot of money. 18 months: that’s just 30% of his 5 year jail time.
7) Sanjay Dutt is married and has two small children
Now here’s where it starts getting interesting. Sanjay married Manyata in 2008 after he was convicted by the TADA court a year earlier. Kids came in much later. No doubt, this ordeal is painful for the family for no fault of theirs. But Sanjay was aware that the final say in the matter was with the Supreme Court. He still chose to take that risk and go ahead with his domestic life. How can this be a mitigating factor to pardon him?
8) He has not been held to be a terrorist, and had no hand in the bomb blasts
Sure, but he is a convicted accused under a serious charge called the Arms Act. In fact, lawyers believe he should be convicted like the other accused under TADA. Because under TADA, at the point of time, possessing an illegal weapon in a notified area – which Mumbai was – automatically attracted the stringent act. Hence he was booked and tried for terror charges just like the others. Lawyers are surprised that he was let off by the courts on this count. It may be true that he didn’t know about the blast conspiracy, but then that was the case with many others too.
9) His parents Sunil Dutt and Nargis worked for the good of society and the nation. They often went to border areas to give moral support to our brave jawans and did other social work for society. Really? How can good karma of his parents, be passed on to mitigate Sanjay’s criminal past? Astrologically it is possible perhaps to access this benefit. But legally?
10) Sanjay in this period of 20 years has through his film revived the memory of Mahatma Gandhi and the message of Gandhiji, the father of the nation.
And here’s where it gets outrageous. Munnabhai is a fictitious filmi character. Sanjay did a great job, but the larger credit for the characterization goes to the director and screenplay writer. Sanjay also played shady roles of criminals in super hit films like Khalnayak and Vaastav. Should that then be taken against him? Certainly, not.The problem with Justice Katju’s appeal is that it is an emotional plea. Coming from a former justice of the Supreme Court, it is expected that beyond sentiments, the appeal should be legally sound.
In fact the power of a pardon is also subject to judicial review and it cannot be exercised whimsically. Critically, it has to be in public good. Alas, Bollywood support continues unabated.
Leave a Comment