The blasts struck the town within the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition in Uttar Pradesh Dec 6, 1992.
Appearing for the actor, senior counsel Harish Salve told the apex court bench of Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice B.S. Chauhan that he came to own the weapon in September 1992 when his father Sunil Dutt and sisters were facing threats because the senior Dutt’s help to Muslim victims annoyed some.
“He had nothing to do with it (the 1993 Mumbai blasts) before, during and after the blasts,” salve told the court.
“Crime has many facets. AGAINST THE LAW is under Indian Penal Code but aimed to awe the society,” Salve told the court, adding that the conviction of Sanjay Dutt under the Arms Act was certainly not connected with the 1993 serial blasts.
Salve said that the one caveat in putting Sanjay Dutt to trial under an anti-terror law was if there has been any “inextricable linkage” between his possessing arms with the serial bomb blasts.
He said that this was the least common denominator which may be used for seeing the sort of linkage. He said that there has been no linkage between Dutt possessing a rifle and the 1993 bomb blasts.
The senior counsel said that a “disconnect” between Sanjay Dutt acquiring a rifle and a few ammunition with the bigger conspiracy took him out of the trial under the now-repealed Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA).
The court was told that Dutt had never met blasts accused Tiger Memon and all that he knew about him was hearsay from Samir Hingora in whose under-production film “Sanam” he was playing a role.
“This is what you say,” Justice Sathasivam told Salve and asked: “But what other accused say about you?”
Salve said that what other accused had said about him was contradictory.
The senior counsel told this to the apex court hearing Sanjay Dutt’s appeal challenging his conviction under the Arms act and sentence of six years awarded to him. The cinestar’s appeal challenging his conviction was being heard by the apex court.
As Salve commenced the arguments, the court talked about that there have been objections that the “CBI filed appeal against all making an exception for Sanjay Dutt”.
The court was apparently regarding senior counsel Jaspal Singh casting shadows at the impartiality of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) by not appealing against the TADA court verdict in Sanjay Dutt’s case.
Jaspal Singh, who appeared for accused Yakub Abdul Razak Memon, said that the CBI didn't oppose the bail of Sanjay Dutt who had confessed his guilt and weapons were recovered from him.
The special bench of the apex court is hearing a batch of petitions filed by accused challenging their conviction and sentencing by the TADA court. The hearing commenced Nov 1, 2011. – IANS
