Dutt gets away lightly, prosecution gets mad

DIWALI DATE: Sanjay Dutt hopes to get good news from the apex court before festival.

Other stories in the section:

Sanjeev Nanda gets 5-year jail term in hit-and-run case

Sanjeev Nanda was found guilty in the case earlier this week.

• New IITs are a disaster, says PM's scientific adviser

• On Teacher Day, Modi turns preacher on anti-terrorism

Featured Blog

Rajdeep Sardesai

Tale of Two Azmis

Featured Slideshows

Related Headlines

powered by

• Sanjay Dutt gets 6 yrs jail, taken into custody
• Sanjay Dutt summoned by TADA court
• Act till you are 100, I took just 6 yrs: Kode told Dutt

Keywords: TADA, Ujjwal Nikam

Mumbai: The prosecution in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case disagrees with a court judgment that actor Sanjay Dutt was not liable to be prosecuted under the Terrorism and Prevention of Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act.

Dutt surrendered before the police after getting a copy of TADA court judge P D Kode’s judgment. In 88 pages related to Dutt’s conviction, the court explains why the actor was punished for illegal arms possession and not terrorism.

The prosecution has reacted sharply to Kode’s comment in the judgment that “it would be difficult to come to the conclusion of accused 117 having committed any of the offences under TADA for which he is charged."

Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam said he didn’t agree with the court. "That Sanjay Dutt possessed an AK-56 rifle for his self-defence and not a terrorist act and therefore he isn’t guilty under the TADA act—I don’t accept that."

Former police officers, who were part of the blasts investigation, agree with Nikam. “How can you say Dutt is not a criminal—okay, he is not connected with the terrorist act but possession of arms is a serious crime," said A S Samara, former commissioner of Mumbai Police.

Prosecutors allege the court has been lenient with Dutt but awarded sentences under TADA to his “accomplices”. Mansoor Ahmed who took away the AK-56 gun from Dutt’s home was charged under TADA and got a 10-year jail term and Zaibunnissa Kazi who helped in hiding the weapon got five years.

But Dutt who owned the gun was given a six-year prison term under the Arms Act. " Accused 117 was already possessing unauthorisedly one 9 mm pistol and hence his further acquiring an AK 56 rifle…for the purposes of commisssion of terrorist activity ...with a notified area does not styand to reason," said Kode.

Nikam says the judgment may set a bad precedent. “It may set a bad precedent, because tomorrow someone might say that I am under threat from anti-social elements and I need an anti-aircraft gun,” he said.

Dutt’s lawyers, when they argue before the Supreme Court, are expected to use Kode’s observation to appeal before bail.