Sanjay gets one more day to surrender
On Wednesday, the actor got yet another day to surrender as arguments opposing his plea will continue on Thursday, reports Mustafa Plumber.india Updated: Feb 07, 2007 21:54 IST
"As virtues cannot be inherited, vices too are completely individual acts." This is what Ujjwal Nikam, special public prosecutor in the 1993 serial blasts case, told the special Terrorist And Disruptive Activities (Prevention) court on Wednesday.
Nikam was opposing Sanjay Dutt's plea seeking relief under the Probation Of Offenders Act.
Dutt was held guilty under the Arms Act 72 days ago. On Wednesday, the actor got yet another day to surrender as arguments opposing his plea will continue on Thursday.
Nikam also harped on the fact that benefit if given to Dutt will be a long lasting and disastrous.
Munnabhai Sanjay Dutt was on Wednesday again granted a day's time to surrender before the designated TADA court that convicted him under the Arms Act. With Wednesday's extension Dutt has been out for the last 72 days since he was convicted. The extension to Dutt was granted as the arguments on his application seeking relief under the Probation Of Offenders Act continued in court on Wednesday.
Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam appearing for the CBI opposed Dutt's application stating that he was of mature age and cannot be given benefit under the Probation Of Offenders Act. Nikam stated: "The benefit of the act has to be given to a youthful offender in order to avoid turning him into an obdurate offender. Before giving the benefit to Dutt, his age (Dutt was 34 when arrested) which indicated that he was mature enough to understand the distinction between a firearm used for hunting and one for mass destruction needs to be considered, he said.
Nikam also pointed out that Dutt himself had stated in his confession that he had meet underworld don Dawood Ibrahim, his brother Anees Ibrahim and many other gangsters in Dubai during his film shooting in 1991. This clearly shows that he knew the gangsters and had kept the arms on Anees Ibrahim's behest that were brought to his house by co-accused Sameer Hingora, Baba Chauhan and Abu Salem.
Dutt also kept an AK-56 with him and did not inform his father, the late MP Sunil Dutt, or the police which shows he was in complete knowledge of the weapons being prohibited. His acts of not informing his family members about the arms even after the riots subsided shows that it was not for his or for his family's defence, Nikam said.
A highly vocal Nikam also opposed the application by arguing that the good work done by his parents namely Nargis Dutt and Sunil Dutt, which was appreciated in the society, cannot be considered while granting benefit to Dutt. Nikam said: "As virtues cannot be inherited, similarly vices are completely individual acts."
Nikam also harped on the fact that benefit if given to Dutt will be long lasting and disastrous. The arguments opposing Dutt's plea will continue on Thursday.
Dutt has moved an application under section 4 of the Probation Of Offenders Act seeking benefit for him by not being sent to jail even though he is convicted under the Arms Act. Dutt has stated his conduct and family responsibilities as the reason for seeking the benefit and also that the offence under which he is convicted attracts a sentence less then life punishment and death.