Double Standards of Justice - Bombay Blasts and Bombay Riots?

Question

Dear fellow Yahoo users:
A heated debate is going on about the quantum of Sanjay Dutts sentence. The Hindustan Times followed by the rest of the media contrasted the double standards of justice meted out in the blasts trials with the absence of any justice whatsoever in the riots cases. Please read the Express link below about the Memons as well as the DNA link about the political twist to Sanjay's case. Today's news has former Commissioner of Police MN Singh openly admitting that politicians prevented prosecution of Satpotdar & co. Another channel had Soli Sorabjee's considered legal opinion that Sanjay ought to have been given relief u/Probation of Offenders Act.
In the interests of justice, perhaps several of the blasts convicts should be given parity with Satpotdar & co. - and set free immediately. Please read the links and think about it. Thank you.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?...
http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/208698.html

Answer 1

Its all political game gsham ji nothing else. As you yourself stated in your question here that former Commissioner of Police MN Singh openly admitting that politicians prevented prosecution of Satpotdar & co. Whom you will blame it for the Corrupt Politicians not the judiciary. The Supreme Court through its constitutional bench comprising of 5 judges had in Sunjay Dutt Vs State II in 1994 had clearly held In the prosecution for an offence punishable under Section 5 of the TADA Act, the prosecution is required to prove that the accused was in conscious 'possession' 'unauthorisedly', in "a notified area" of any arms and ammunition specified in Columns 2 and 3 of Category I or Category III(a) of Schedule to the Arms Rules, 1962 or bombs, dynamite or other explosive substances. No further nexus with any terrorist or disruptive activity is required to be proved by the prosecution in view of the statutory
Presumption indicated earlier. The accused in
his defence is entitled to prove the non-
existence of a fact constituting any of these
ingredients. As a part of his defence, he can
prove by adducing evidence, the nonexistence
of facts constituting the third ingredient as
indicated earlier to rebut the statutory
presumption. The accused is entitled to prove
by adducing evidence that the purpose of his
unauthorised possession of any such arms and
ammunition etc. was wholly unrelated to any
terrorist or disruptive activity. If the accused succeeds in proving the absence of the said third ingredient, then his mere unauthorised possession of any such arms and ammunition etc. is punishable only under the general law by virtue of Section 12 of the TADA Act and not under Section 5 of the TADA Act.
If the law enforcement bodies failed to over look this directives of the Highest court of India regarding the mere possession of deadly weapons in the notified areas will be presumed amounts to the person covered under the provisions of TADA & only on the political pressure they ignore to go in for prosecution then the actual blame lies on "WE THE PEOPLE OF INDIA" who elect these rascal politicians to our Legislature & make them our ultimate bosses to rule on us. Our courts can only decide the matter brought before to them for prosecution, they cannot go after running every police officer to bring the culprits to the record books, its the executives ruling this country & who happen to be these corrupt politicians who spoil the whole game of law & order. I wish I had the powers to punish these corrupt politicians & would have ordered them to be publicly hanged till death.

Answer 2

Sanjay Dutta was awarded for six years of imprisonment for possessing illegal weapon and for participating in the parties hosted by underworld dons. He was convicted for the offence under Arms Act not under TADA. So there is no double standard of justice because other offenders were convicted under TADA because they have participated in the Mumbai Blasts.

Answer 3

that's the reason gandhiji is relavent whilst we communicate.. now a days we are annoying eye for a watch.. its no longer that one side is incorrect and the different is nice.. the two aspects are at faults.. of direction the muslims are at a greater physically powerful fault yet on their area hindus are no saints the two.. nonetheless its surprisingly obtrusive that a hindu cant call pakistan a house whilst a muslim can proudly say that he's an indian.. besides the fact that in this context the political difficulty is to blame.. pakistani leaders considering jinnah were annoying entire muslim dominance while india is secular.. the human beings act as they are guided.. its extreme time we hear to our judgment of right and incorrect because of the fact no manis animal.. we are all human beings at heart regardless of being hindus or muslims....

Answer 4

the scale of justice is always manipulated by the unethical heavy weights.