PAGES

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Sanjay Dutt jailed

This is one celebrity verdict the nation wouldn't forget so fast.

The arrest, 14-year trial and coviction in the 1993 Mumbai blast case has been a humiliation and a punishment for Sanjay Dutt. A mistake is a mistake. The smallness or bigness of it is relative, subjective.

There is a lesson here that shouldn't be missed: It'sn't worth getting on the wrong side of law, not even for some time. The law will catch up sooner or later. That it hasn't caught up with some (many criminals) is no justification that it shouldn't catch up with the others.

10 comments:

  1. The general opinion on the verdict is that it has been harsh. I am not advocating that Dutt should be in jail but the same people who are quick to notice the "harshness" in the verdict would have sung the "why-should-the-law-be-different-for-celebrities" song if Dutt would have been let off with anything less.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am not so sure about the verdict or its correctness. As we all agree, law was created by man (would you say today that all of hammurabi was right?), for the convenience of maintaining modern society and being inhumane should not be a facet of it. By the same token, look at salman khan who's car killed people. and he is wandering around scot free!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. well wht do i say about India's law its really a crap.... it takes a hell lot of time for the trials.... the criminal should be punished as soon as the crime is committed not after decades of his/her pleasurable life. I'm not advocating dat Sanjay Dutt should not be punished. Every wrong deed should compensated by a gud 1


    guruofsmallthings.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agree totally and the media and public should start confusing his role in a film with his real personality.What he did was a serious crime and no one is above law and he has to serve his sentence gracefully.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sanjay Dutts conviction has restored my faith in the judicial system. Now I want to see Salman meeting a similar fate.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pradeep, I have tagged you - http://r2blore.blogspot.com/2007/08/tagged.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. Nice post.. agree 100%... if Sanjay Dutt's sister visited Sonia to ask for intervention then all the 100 who have been convicted need to be "intervened" as well...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Does celebrity status makes someone immune to the Law? This whole saga sounds ridiculous to me. Let Sanjay Dutt be a Mahatma but he had an AK-47 in his possession. It is a CRIME no matter what angle you look at it. This is not Movie. This is real life.

    He deserves the punishment.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with you. The punishement to Sanjay Dutt is too harsh. I personally feel that even 18 months imprisonment he underwent was beyond what was needed.

    I am not fan of Sanjay Dutt and I always say Law should be same. But when Sanjay didnt kill anyone, didnt harm anyone, didnt know a damn about blast, why do some people want him behind bars for 6 years?

    Will they say the same thing if thier loved one is behind bars? It is exactly because of such punishment to common people we start to lose faith in law.

    If there is anyone who should be going behind bars, it is people who drive drunken killing anyone on the way, it is people who indulge in all sorts of corruptions in all offices.

    Not advocating that Sanjay is innocent but I hope we are clear that the debate is about the sentence being too harsh.

    ReplyDelete
  10. conviction or acquittal is a matter of evidence. If there are sufficient and cogent evidence on record then conviction must follow and if there are no evidence, or there is slightest doubt about the offence being committed by the accused then he must get benifit of that.The accused may be a celibrity or a common man. Moreover the verdict should not be affected by media publicity.

    ReplyDelete