Sanjay Dutt case: Law breakers can't be law makers

By M. Gautham Machaiah

The Supreme Court’s refusal to stay Sanjay Dutt’s conviction in connection with the 1993 Mumbai blasts case and thereby disallowing him to contest the Lok Sabha polls will go a long way in cleansing the Parliament of criminal elements.

Dutt was disqualified under Section 8 (3) of The Representation of The People Act, which debars a person sentenced to two or more years of imprisonment, from contesting the elections. Dutt was convicted to six years imprisonment under the Arms Act for possession of an AK-56 rifle, a 9 mm pistol and grenades given by co-accused Abu Salem before the Mumbai blasts.

The actor who was fielded by the Samajawadi Party from Lucknow had approached the Supreme Court seeking suspension of his conviction in order to enable him to contest the polls. Had the apex court upheld his plea, it would have opened the floodgates for several other politicians convicted of much more heinous crime, to enter the hallowed precincts of the Parliament.

Sanjay Dutt evoked the magic of his patriotic father Sunil Dutt to convince the court that he was not an anti-national. Apparently, he had kept the weapons in his house for self defense! The actor not only tried to reason with the court that there was no criminal case against him before the blasts, but also did his best to impress the judges about his good conduct thereafter.

The court has rightly thrown the case out of the door. Can a person be absolved of a serious crime just because of the patriotic credentials of his father? Is Sanjay Dutt a little child not to understand that it is illegal to posses an AK-56 rifle and grenades? Would law abiding citizens stock hand grenades in their houses even if it is for self-protection?

Let is not be forgotten that the actor was in possession of these weapons at the time of the blasts, and that he procured them from the very perpetrators of this operation which left many innocent people dead. This clearly establishes his link with the underworld.

Mere good conduct after the commission of a crime does not entitle one to lenient treatment. Terrorists, their accomplices or associates must be dealt with the severest of punishment and Sanjay Dutt is no exception.

By its historic order, the Supreme Court has proved that law breakers cannot become law makers.

(Picture sourced from: http://content.msn.co.in/NR/rdonlyres/F1D53E15-519D-4FEC-85B9-F6FA82198FD0/0/SanjayDutt6.jpg)

COMMENTS

Justice is not just to be done, but seen to be done.SC's is done and also seen. As you rightly said Supreme Courts judgment will go a long way in keeping people of criminal record out of the political system.

-Abha Banerjee, Mumbai

Aaah. Now Sanjay Dutt can sit back and ponder about what could have been. On tbis note, should there be a retirement age for politicians? Experience, of course, comes with age. So does dementia. Good blogs Gautham.

-Cherian Thomas, Dubai

Every now and then our judiciary has been taking an active part in protecting the interests of voters and thus helping to bring back confidence in "Elections & Leaders"! The youth of India, at least now should take an active part in the up-coming elections. Please go and vote so that it is not mis-utilised by some anti-social elements. Good read Gautham.

-A. Anju, Hyderabad