The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave actor Sanjay Dutt four weeks to surrender before the police in connection with the 1993 Mumbai blasts.
The actor had filed an application seeking six months’ extension of the April 18 deadline set by the Court on March 21 while pronouncing the final verdict in the Mumbai blasts case.
Since Dutt has several films lined up, he claimed that his imminent arrest will result in losses to the tune of Rs278 crores to film producers.
SC’s relief to Dutt has set a precedent which can be used by any convict to seek a similar favour from the court on grounds of commercial or personal reasons.
The same bench will hear four similar applications by other accused on Thursday. Just a day ago, another bench of the apex court had dismissed petitions filed by three aged convicts — Zaibunisa Akhtar Kazi, Issaq Mohammad Hajwane and Sharif Abdul Parker, who sought extension of time to surrender till the disposal of their mercy petitions.
Senior advocate Harish Salve who appeared for Dutt was cautious not to argue on merit. Urging mercy for his client and not enforcement of any Constitutional rights, Salve distinguished Dutt’s case from the rest.
When the bench asked Salve if his client was unaware of the TADA Court judgement of 2007 before signing up the films, Salve pleaded that an extension of time to surrender would help Dutt wind up his work.
Using its discretionary powers under the Constitution, the bench of Justices P Sathasivam and BS Chauhan agreed to extend the deadline by four weeks, clarifying that no further extension will be granted.
Dutt’s plea was opposed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Additional Solicitor-General (ASG) HP Raval informed the court that he had written instructions to oppose the relief sought by Dutt as in the CBI’s opinion “commercial” interest could not override administration of criminal justice.
However, the CBI was stumped by the apex court, which reminded the ASG that the agency had let Dutt off the hook by not appealing against his acquittal under the draconian Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act (TADA) law by the trial court.
His six-year punishment came under the Arms Act for illegally possessing an AK-56 rifle and 9 mm pistol, said to be part of the cache of weapons smuggled for the blasts.
The apex court altered the sentence to five years, paving the way for his surrender to undergo the remaining sentence of three-and-a-half years.
The apex court reminded the CBI that in other appeals against acquittal, it had reversed the findings and awarded sentences.
“In some appeals we have enhanced sentence…We had pointed out that you have not challenged his (Dutt) acquittal under TADA. Why didn’t you do it,” the bench observed.