The Denouement
in the Sanjay Dutt Criminal Case
*********
Written
by Dr. Seshadri Kumar, 22 March, 2013
Copyright © Dr. Seshadri Kumar. All Rights Reserved.
For other articles by Dr. Seshadri Kumar, please visit http://www.leftbrainwave.com
You can reach me on twitter @KumarSeshadri.
You can reach me on twitter @KumarSeshadri.
Disclaimer: All the opinions expressed in this article are
the opinions of Dr. Seshadri Kumar alone and should not be construed to mean
the opinions of any other person or organization, unless explicitly stated otherwise
in the article.
******
On March 21, 2013, a 20-year-old legal case of national
importance finally came to an end in the halls of the Supreme Court of India. This was the well-known case of the 1993 Bombay serial
blasts, in which 257 people lost their lives and 713 people were injured in
a terrorist attack masterminded by Mumbai underworld don Dawood Ibrahim and his
associates.
In the investigations that
followed, the police unearthed links to many people, and one of the prime
accused was Bollywood star Sanjay Dutt, who was found to have been in contact
with the brother of Dawood Ibrahim in Dubai, Anees Ibrahim, and various other
associates of Dawood; who was found to have possessed 3 AK-56 automatic rifles,
20 hand grenades, 9 magazines, 450 rounds of ammunition, and a 9 mm hand
pistol, in his residence, before, during, and after the attacks; and who
attempted to destroy the AK-56 rifles by having an accomplice melt the guns.
The case was prosecuted in Mumbai and, initially, the police interrogated Dutt with third-degree methods, which was to be expected from Indian police, given the depth of his involvement and the scale of the terrorist attacks. However, due to the influence of his father Sunil Dutt, a popular member of parliament (MP) after his highly successful film career in Bollywood, and the help of many other rich and influential people, Sanjay Dutt managed to get bail after 18 months.
The case was prosecuted in Mumbai and, initially, the police interrogated Dutt with third-degree methods, which was to be expected from Indian police, given the depth of his involvement and the scale of the terrorist attacks. However, due to the influence of his father Sunil Dutt, a popular member of parliament (MP) after his highly successful film career in Bollywood, and the help of many other rich and influential people, Sanjay Dutt managed to get bail after 18 months.
The
TADA Court Verdict
With the case crawling through the infamously-slow Indian justice
system, it took until 2007 for the special TADA (Terrorist And Disruptive
Activities (Prevention) Act) Court to pronounce its verdict on the 189 accused
in the case, some of whom had died in the interim. The court, very surprisingly, exonerated
Sanjay Dutt of the charges of terrorism against him, but found him guilty of
illegal possession of prohibited arms and sentenced him to six years of
rigorous imprisonment.
That this itself was a travesty of justice can be clearly
seen by reading the detailed
Tehelka article on the 2007 verdict on Sanjay Dutt. The article clearly details how:
1.
Sanjay Dutt was closely connected to Dawood
Ibrahim’s brother, Anees Ibrahim, as phone records clearly show.
2.
Sanjay Dutt was clearly associated with many
criminals and terrorists closely associated with Dawood Ibrahim’s gang, many of
whom were convicted on terrorism charges by the same court.
3.
Sanjay Dutt had in his possession 3 AK-56s, 450
rounds of ammunition, 20 hand grenades, 9 magazines, and a 9 mm pistol. Possession of just the 3 AK-56 rifles or the
20 hand grenades alone would have been sufficient to sentence him as a
terrorist under the TADA act. But the
CBI, for reasons known only to them, chose to press less serious charges
against him.
4.
Other accused in the case, whose involvement
with Anees Ibrahim wasn’t even shown, who were less consequential second-level
middlemen, and who did not even have in their possession similar quantities of
arms, were sentenced under TADA, whereas Dutt was not.
5.
Sanjay Dutt had strong connections with the
well-known associate of Dawood Ibrahim, Abu Salem, and there was clear
documentary evidence linking the arms found in Sanjay Dutt’s possession to the
cache of arms being smuggled around the country by Abu Salem. The CBI chose to de-link Sanjay Dutt’s case
from that of Abu Salem’s.
6.
Dutt, on knowing that the police was on his
trail, asked accomplices to melt down the AK-56 rifles found at his place – a case
of destruction of evidence.
Anyone else would have wept with joy and gratefully accepted
this huge leniency of the justice system towards a criminal and a terrorist who
should be behind bars for the rest of his life and, had he truly changed in the
years after 1993 and regretted what he did, not oppose the sentence but
immediately gone about serving it.
But not Sanjay Dutt.
He is among those who believes that the rich answer to a different
law. After all, this was the person who
had many run-ins with the
law during his youth on drug-related offenses, and gotten out of jail’s way
mainly due to the influence of his rich and powerful father. This, he probably felt, wasn’t anything
different.
So he appealed his sentence in the Supreme Court. He also moved bail in the Supreme Court, and
in another shocking show of leniency (not shown to other co-accused) he was
allowed to freely move about and pursue his profession of acting while his
co-conspirators counted the bars in their jail cells. Dutt continued to act in high-profile,
money-making movies in the time he should have been serving his sentence while his co-conspirators continued to rot in jail.
Supreme
Court Verdict of March 21, 2013
On March 21, 2013, the Supreme Court finally pronounced
its verdict on all the appeals in the 1993 Bombay blasts case, bringing the
case to a close. The Supreme Court did
not acquit Dutt, but commuted his sentence from 6 years to 5, with 18 months of
that sentence treated as already served.
The court ordered Dutt to voluntarily surrender within 30 days.
The reaction of Mumbai’s film industry has been expectedly self-serving,
cowardly, and bereft of any national spirit.
Many
of them rushed to post tweets
of sympathy for Dutt. Many were
concerned that their film projects would now be stalled because of the conviction. But all this was expected. Mumbai’s film industry is really the last
place you would expect any sort of serious reaction to such matters.
The
Hypocrisy of Markandey Katju
But what was not expected was a reaction
in support of Dutt from, of all people, retired Supreme Court Justice and
current Press Council of India Chairman Markandey Katju. Justice Katju wrote an open letter to
Maharashtra Governor K. Sankaranarayanan asking him to pardon Sanjay Dutt. The letter is such a cynical and unprincipled
letter that had I not seen for sure that it had been penned by Justice Katju, I
would not have believed it.
Katju appeals for leniency for Dutt on the grounds that
Katju appeals for leniency for Dutt on the grounds that
1.
His parents have done social service for the nation.
2.
He played the role of a Gandhi-lover in a film (“Lage Raho Munnabhai”).
3.
The event happened 20 years ago.
4.
Dutt has already suffered a lot because the trial took so
long and everyone assumed he was a terrorist all these years.
5.
"He had to undergo various tribulations and indignities during
this period. He had to go to court often, he had to take the permission of the
court for foreign shootings, he could not get bank loans, etc."
6. Govt. pardoned Commander
Nanavati, who was guilty of murder, many years ago, and murder is a
much more serious crime than possession of prohibited arms.
Is
Katju serious??? Here are the problems (pointwise) with his nonsensical argument:
1.
Dutt's parents' social service has nothing to do with him.
2.
Dutt played a role in a movie as a Gandhi-lover. This has
nothing to do with what he really is. It's just a role in a movie. As one friend commented on facebook, by this
logic, Ben Kingsley could not be convicted for anything anytime after playing
Gandhi in the eponymous movie of 1982.
3.
When the event actually happened is irrelevant to the demands
of justice. If a criminal commits murder or robs a bank and goes into hiding
for 30 years, should he not be sentenced once found?
4.
If Dutt suffered a lot because of the long trial, so did all
the other undertrials. Did they get off scot-free? Why this special treatment
for Dutt?
5.
Any under-trial has to undergo all these inconveniences. The
amazing thing is the amount of discretion and leniency shown to Dutt. How many
others accused of such serious crimes would be allowed to go abroad, or allowed
to make a handsome living making crores of rupees as a movie star while under
investigation for such crimes? And it isn't that he was found innocent. How
many of us ordinary Indians would be allowed all these privileges if we had
been caught with an AK-56 and 20 hand grenades in our home?
6.
Each case is different. If Katju's argument were to be used,
every convict who has been convicted of any jail sentence could ask for a presidential
pardon because they didn't commit murder. This is an idiotic line of reasoning.
All
this is highly unbecoming of a man who once held the August office of a Justice
of the Supreme Court of India. Even an illiterate in law can tell that what he is
asking is contrary to basic justice and equality under the law. If the
principle of equality under the law is applied, then what applied to the other
undertrials should have been applied to Dutt. That they haven't so far is
already a travesty. Giving a pardon to Dutt would be a complete mockery of
justice in India.
And it is odd that this is coming from a man who has been decrying the nonstop focus on celebrities and movie stars in this country and who has been arguing for a rational interpretation of the law. Katju has proved that he is not above anyone else in being starstruck and pandering to the basest instincts. He has also thereby lost the moral right to lecture the media on the way they are focused on celebrities and movie stars.
And it is odd that this is coming from a man who has been decrying the nonstop focus on celebrities and movie stars in this country and who has been arguing for a rational interpretation of the law. Katju has proved that he is not above anyone else in being starstruck and pandering to the basest instincts. He has also thereby lost the moral right to lecture the media on the way they are focused on celebrities and movie stars.
Concluding Thoughts
Sanjay
Dutt committed a crime. He committed treason against the country. He aided and abetted terrorists. He got away on the very serious charges of
terrorism because he had contacts in high places and because he was the son of
a sitting MP with the ruling party. But
at least the TADA court convicted him on the lesser charge of illegal
possession of prohibited arms.
He
should pay for at least this crime the same way you or I would have to, had we
been convicted of a similar crime. An ordinary Indian found in possession of an
AK-56 rifle and 20 hand grenades would not have seen the outside of a jail for
the last 20 years. Dutt has been allowed to roam free, make movies, travel
abroad, live a generally grand life. In that sense, he has already been allowed
more privileges than any of the rest of us have or will ever have been allowed.
It
is time to stop this nonsense and enforce the idea of equality under the law.
Let him at least spend the next 3.5 years in jail serving a sentence of rigorous imprisonment.
Let him at least spend the next 3.5 years in jail serving a sentence of rigorous imprisonment.
And
let us never again dignify the nonsensical pronouncements
of a certain Justice Katju, who by his latest ramblings has completely lost
credibility.
