Suspense thriller

Sir — Sanjay Dutt was found guilty under the Arms Act but was acquitted of the terror and conspiracy charges by the courts (“Sanjay escapes with arms rap”, Nov 29). He had already received punishment for his wrongdoing in 1994, when he had had to spend 16 months in jail. Since then, he seems to have reformed his ways — which amounts to some sort of atonement for his misdeeds. This is not to condone his act, but adverse situations like this often arise in people’s lives, and they have to deal with them. Dutt is trying to deal with his past as best he can and has certainly lived like a responsible citizen after his release from jail.

Yours faithfully,
Mahesh Kapasi, New Delhi

Sir — Perhaps all Indians are relieved to know that Sanjay Dutt is not a terrorist. This was confirmed by the court. Dutt had said earlier that he had acquired and retained arms only for self-defence in the wake of the communal riots in Mumbai. Yet, it cannot be overlooked that those who supplied these weapons to him were terrorists. What, then, should one conclude?

Yours faithfully,
G. Bhattacharya, Paschim Midnapur

Sir — P.D. Kode, the judge of the Tada court had said, “During my reasoning I have not found him (Sanjay Dutt) to be a terrorist.” If that is true, then the editorial, “Arm’s length” (Nov 29), has correctly pointed out that “The plea that (Sanjay) Dutt possessed an AK-56 for self-defence is thus a spurious one... Thereby also hangs the question why Dutt possessed such a weapon and how he came to acquire it.” Although keeping a weapon is a ‘lesser’ crime than aiding a conspiracy, one cannot dispute the serious nature of it. The media, politicians and film-lovers might feel that Dutt’s 16-month stint behind bars is adequate punishment for his crime. But in the eyes of the law, he is not a filmstar but an ordinary citizen who would have to be punished if found guilty. There should be no discrimination between him and the other accused. Nor should he get more sympathy than he deserves. The conviction of Dutt under the Arms Act sends a powerful message to the country. Also, it is a warning to the rich and famous, who think that they can get away with anything, from shooting endangered animals to keeping illegal arms.

Yours faithfully,
Bidyut Kumar Chatterjee, Faridabad

Sir — Sanjay Dutt’s turning delinquent during his youth and then sobering down after his father’s death confirms that he has reworked his life in the past few years. However, his past mistakes have now caught up with him and could land him in jail for another five years. The only silver lining is that Dutt has been cleared of the terrorist tag.

Yours faithfully,
T.R. Anand, Calcutta

Sir — The verdict on Sanjay Dutt has not come as a surprise (“Softly, softly on Sanjay”, Nov 30). While Zaibunnisa Kazi was convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act for keeping the same weapons that Dutt possessed earlier, Dutt has not been convicted under Tada. This leaves a lot of people baffled, since the law of the land is supposed to be the same for all citizens.

Yours faithfully,
Ashok S. Mehta, Calcutta

Sir — It should have occurred to Sanjay Dutt, when he kept the AK-56 with him, that the possession of unlicensed firearms could attract prosecution and punishment. It is surprising that the prosecution did not pursue his connection with the underworld don, Abu Salem, from whom Dutt procured the weapons. This could have revealed whether Dutt was involved in the Mumbai blasts conspiracy of 1993 or not.

Yours faithfully,
C.V.K. Moorthy, Bangalore

Sir — It appears that Sanjay Dutt’s prayers in the various temples in Pune and Mumbai have finally paid off. Dutt’s case should serve as a lesson for Bollywood as well as the new generation. Had Sunil Dutt been alive, he would have been relieved at the verdict, especially since he had spent years trying to rescue his son from drugs, while convincing people that Sanjay was not a terrorist but a victim of circumstances.

Yours faithfully,
R. Sekar, Nalco Nagar, Orissa

Sir — It has been rightly observed in the editorial, “Arm’s length”, that nobody owns a sophisticated gun like the AK-56 for self-defence because it is not an ordinary gun. It is a prohibited weapon and no civilian can get away with possessing it under any circumstances. The judge may have accepted the stand taken by Dutt’s counsel, but this does not hold water under the Arms Act. Besides, the time taken for pronouncing the verdict — a staggering 13 years — tells its tale about the lethargic legal process in our country. Dutt’s fate thus hangs on the amount of time taken by the court to dispense with all the charges.

Yours faithfully,
P.B. Saha, Calcutta

The new Dandi

Sir — The photograph of Mamata Banerjee sowing potato seeds is reminiscent of the salt satyagraha of Mahatma Gandhi at Dandi. While the Dandi march was on foot, Banerjee’s protest had a convoy of 20 cars. But the question remains: does the one-lakh-rupee “people’s car” offer a better deal to the farmers than potatoes priced at Rs 12 per kilogram or paddies at Rs 10? There have been many other projects in India where car plants have eaten into agricultural land. The difference here is that in Singur, notwithstanding the protests, farmers are getting lured by the benefits proposed by the Tatas. Amidst all the drama, the fence-sitters are waiting and watching who offers a higher price.

Yours faithfully,
Surajit Das, Calcutta