The Hindu : Front Page : Supreme Court grants interim bail to Sanjay Dutt, five others

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Aug 21, 2007
ePaper

Front Page

Front Page

Supreme Court grants interim bail to Sanjay Dutt, five others

J. Venkatesan

— PHOTO: AFP

HERE’S WAITING: Fans of actor Sanjay Dutt wait outside Yerwada Jail in Pune on Monday for his release.

NEW DELHI: Taking into consideration the fact that the Mumbai Special Court is yet to give its judgment on sentencing of the accused in the 1993 bomb blasts case, the Supreme Court on Monday granted interim bail to actor Sanjay Dutt sentenced to undergo six years’ imprisonment. The Court granted similar relief to five others who had challenged their conviction and sentence of imprisonment for varying periods.

A three-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, Justice C. K. Thakker and Justice R. V. Raveendran, however, made it clear to the petitioners that they would have to surrender soon after the judgment was pronounced by the designated court and the copy of the judgment was made available to them.

The Bench said that as soon as the judgment on sentencing was ready, the designated court should fix a date for its pronouncement and give copies to the accused. It said Sanjay Dutt and others would be released on the same conditions that were imposed by the Court when they were granted bail initially during the pendency of the trial. It directed them to surrender their passports, if they had not done so already.

They were asked to appear between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. every Sunday before the Special Task Force of the CBI in Mumbai during the period they are on bail. When senior counsel Ashok Desai, appearing for Sanjay Dutt, said that it might take some time for the trial court to give its judgment on sentencing though the judgment on conviction was delivered on November 28, 2006, the Bench said, “We treat the petitioners as if there had been no conviction. Since they were on bail during the trial, we can grant them bail on condition that they would surrender after the judgment on sentencing is pronounced.”

“In the absence of the judgment,” the Bench said, “it is not possible for us to consider the extent of evidence against the petitioners and whether the evidence had been properly considered or not.”

Appearing for the CBI, Additional Solicitor-General Gopal Subramanian said there were three types of bomb blast cases —major (TADA offences, conspiracy, etc), minor and those in the periphery (only Arms Act offences, etc). “We do not want to give any impression that we are not acting with seriousness or acting with a particular person in mind,” he said.

When counsel for the petitioners wanted a week or 10 days to surrender after the judgment was pronounced as it might take some time to get the judgment copy, the Bench said,

“Your argument is unheard of in criminal jurisprudence. We will not permit such an argument. You [petitioner concerned] will have to surrender after the judgment is pronounced.”

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page