1.Sanjay is supposed to be out on probation. During that period he should not be drinking. The article states that he has been drinking. Punishable Offence. 2. Sanjay would have been in jail all these years. It is only because of his family agreed to pay Shiv Sena that he is out on bail. 3. Just like all who were involved in the arms transactions (arms & ammunition that were given to him) have been booked under TADA, he too should have been booked under it. 4. General people are forgetting the act of 1993. Just because there is 50/100 crores riding on him OR just because he has a daughter does not mean that he should be pardoned. If thats the case all those who had lost their lives in 1993 and also those who have been sentenced also have daughters/families. Do we excuse all of them? 5. Judiciary shoud,re-check again on what basis he had been let out on bail.
I agree with you on all the points, except the point where in you say, "Sanjay is out only because he paid Shivsena"; But, in what way paying to Shivsena will influence the TADA judge who granted him bail?
In the process of arguing "no one, however big he/she may be, should be treated more equal than others", let us not suspect the credentials/integrity of the TADA judge who is doing his job exceptionally well, without getting influenced by anything other than fair trial.
RE:facts
by adn on Jul 31, 2007 12:54 PM Permalink
Dear Dayanand, Trust me there is more to this than the eye can see. Thats the reason i have stated point number 5.
