An appeal to His Excellency the Governor of Maharashtra to pardon Sanjay Dutt under Article 161 of the Constitution. Through the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Maharashtra
The media has reported today that Sanjay Dutt has been awarded 5 years imprisonment by the Supreme Court. I appeal to you to pardon him under Article 161 of the Constitution for the following reasons:
(i) The Supreme Court, having found that Sanjay Dutt had in his possession a prohibited weapon without a licence, awarded him the minimum imprisonment which was prescribed under law. Section 25 (1(A) of the Arms Act states that if a person has in his possession a prohibited weapon without a licence he shall be awarded punishment of not less than 5 years imprisonment and not more than 10 years. Having found Sanjay Dutt in possession of a prohibited weapon, which is defined in Section 2 (1) (i) of the Arms Act as an automatic weapon which keeps firing until release of the pressure on the trigger, the Supreme Court awarded him 5 years imprisonment. However, there is power in the Court under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to release the person under these circumstances of the case on furnishing a bond.
(ii) The power of pardon under Article 161 by the Constitution is different from the judicial power. The Governor/President can grant pardon or reduce the sentence of the Court, even if a minimum is prescribed. Hence there is no doubt that the Governor can grant pardon/reduce the sentence.
For example in the case of Commander Nanavati who was held guilty of murder, the Governor gave him pardon although the minimum sentence for murder is life sentence.
In the case of Sanjay Dut, the Supreme Court has not found him guilty for the 1993 bomb blasts, but only found him guilty of having in his possession a prohibited weapon without licence. Surely, this is a lesser offence than murder. When the Governor of Maharashtra granted pardon to Nanavati, surely he can grant pardon to Sanjay.
No doubt Sanjay Dutt committed an offence by having a prohibited weapon without licence, but in my opinion there are extenuating circumstance:
In these circumstances I respectfully appeal to your Excellency to pardon Sanjay Dutt and set him free.
I am reminded of the famous speech of Portia in Shakespeare’s ‘Merchant of Venice’ that justice should be tempered with mercy.
The need of the hour is to identify the Katjus in judiciary. Considering such people enjoy unprecedented immunity during their service life and possibly thereafter, we may atleast be warned to be wary of them.
Yes Sir. With you and people like Arundhati Roy, we will only have convicted criminals roaming free and the law abiding citizen behind bars. Wouldnt it be better to name NHRC as National Criminals Rights commission and you heading the same as Chairman emeritus.
OB Van Politics of J Katju_relevant quotes from SC judgment dtd 21/3/13 about Begum Zaibunisa Anwar Kazi,whose Daughter says Salem was coming to Begum Kazi's house as property dealer .She should be asked about how many property deals Salem has managed or even tried for Begum Kazi's family.Repeat offence is taken very seriously in law,in fact.
(Reason) quote"It is indeed true that
considering the role played by her in storing the weapons
in her house or even for A-89 being also instrumental for
taking the said weapons does create a strong suspicion of
both of them being man of confidence of prime
(Reason ) quote"(34) However, considering the repeated participation of A-
119 in allowing absconding accused Anees Ibrahim to store
the weapons at her house or with her, herself taking up the
weapons in spite of knowing the purpose for which the
same were sent by Anees, the evidence pertaining to
second occasion clearly revealing that the weapons were 2
AK-56 Rifles and the ammunition and thereby all the
evidence establishing that the same being brought to India
for commission of terrorists Act i.e. by and for the
(Reason ) quote"(32)Now considering the period in which the
relevant had occurred and the period after which the police
had received the information, merely because evidence
does not reveal of any material being found at the house of
A-119 will not be a ground for discarding the said material
in the confession of A-89. As a matter of fact, event the
said material itself reveals that the said weapons were to
be kept with her and were to be collected back by Abu
Salem; non-finding of weapon with her clearly appears to
be insignificant circumstance. "unquote
(Reason ) quote"Retracted Confessions:
38) It has been contended that since the confession of the
appellant - Sanjay Dutt (A-117) has been retracted, hence, it
is not trustworthy and it would not be safe to place reliance
upon it. It is settled law that a voluntary and free
confession, even if later retracted, can be relied upon."unquote
(Reason ) -recorded on pages 40-41 in clause 21of judgment in criminal appeal no 1060 of 2007.Quote"Confessional Statement of Manzoor Ahmed Sayyed
i) A-89 was a good friend of Abu Salem.
ii) He owns a Maruti 1000 bearing No. MP 23 B-9264.
iii) On 22/23rd January, 1993, A-89 met A-139. A-139 gave
the keys of his car to A-41 who kept a black bag of
weapons in it.
iv) A-139 and A-89 then went to the first floor of 22 Mount
Mary, Vidhyanchal Apts. They gave the bag to an old lady, viz., Zaibunisa Anwar Kazi (A-119) and told her
that the arms were for the purpose of causing riots, and
were sent by Anees Ibrahim - brother of Dawood
v) A-119 looked at the contents of the bag and then kept
it at her residence.
vi) After 8 days, A-139 called A-89 again and together with
A-40, they went to the residence of A-117 where he
gave them a blue rexin bag and a carton.
vii) Abu Salem and A-89 then went to the house of A-119
and gave the carton and the bag to her. Abu Salem
told A-119 to keep those weapons safely as they were
to be used for orchestrating bomb blasts."unquote
First such bomb blast must not be used by anyone for furthering ambitions of cheap politics or mishandling will bring situation like forgotten plight of Kashmiri Pandits even by J Katju because highlighting plights of Kashmiri Pandits will not make him Governor or Rajya Sabha MP and he must benevolently consider resigning in the name of unwritten propriety which he professed frequently in judgments in HC and SC, from present salaried post for not focussing in his job like former army chief,although projecting honest image.
Every time Mr. Katju opens his mouth, one wonders what were his judgments like as a judge on the SC.
Katju has lost all sense of proportion.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT