Following Bombay High Court’s order asking the Maharashtra government to explain Sanjay Dutt’s early release in the 1993 serial blasts case, state Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni has now said that if the court is not convinced of the reasons provided for Sanjay Dutt’s ‘special remission’, the actor can be sent back to jail.
The Bombay High Court has asked the state government to submit a fresh affidavit in two weeks time, explaining the criteria of good behaviour applied to the actor and the reasons for him being let off before his term. The step is being seen as an effort to streamline the legal system with regards to furloughs and remission of jail terms.
The Maharashtra government upholds its stand that Dutt was given no special treatment and that his release was as per the rules laid down in the jail manual.
Sanjay Dutt’s release is exactly as per the rules and jail manual, just like a common prisoner. Not a single day of special remission has been awarded to him. He has been treated as an ordinary prisoner all along.Official, Maharashtra Home Affairs
A Maharashtra Home Affairs official had previously clarified that no case was registered against the actor for indiscipline during his jail term.
No case has been registered against him for default or indiscipline while he was in jail. There was no adverse report from police as well when he was out of jail. The Court has asked for more details, which we will provide.Official, Maharashtra Home Affairs (as on July 17, 2017)
Dutt was earlier sentenced to five years in jail for possession of arms, which were a part of the consignment used in the 1993 blasts.
The actor, who was on bail during the trial, had surrendered in May 2013, after the Supreme Court upheld his conviction.
Dutt was let out in February 2016, eight months early, on account of his good conduct while in Pune’s Yerwada prison.
A division bench of justices RM Sawant and Sadhana Jadhav heard a public interest litigation by Pune resident Pradeep Bhalekar challenging the regular paroles and furloughs granted to Dutt when he was serving his sentence.
The court had then directed the state government to file an affidavit stating what parameters were considered and the procedures that were followed while deciding that Dutt deserved leniency.
Was the DIG, Prisons, consulted or did the jail superintendent directly send his recommendation to the governor? Also, how did the authorities assess that Dutt’s conduct was good? When did they get the time to make such assessment when he was out on parole half the time?Justice Sawant (when the PIL was first heard in June 2017)
During the investigation and the marathon trial, Dutt spent 18 months in jail.
On 31 July 2007, the TADA court in Mumbai sentenced him to six years' rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act and imposed a fine of Rs 25,000.
In 2013, the Supreme Court upheld the ruling but reduced the sentence to five years, following which he surrendered to serve the remainder of his sentence.
During his imprisonment, Dutt was granted parole of 90 days in December 2013 and later again for 30 days.
(With inputs from PTI and ANI)
(We all love to express ourselves, but how often do we do it in our mother tongue?
Here's your chance! This Independence Day, khul ke bol with BOL – Love your Bhasha. Sing, write, perform, spew poetry – whatever you like – in your mother tongue. Send us your BOL at bol@thequint.com or WhatsApp it to 9910181818.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)