Why is it that we need celebrities as riders onto whose back we can latch to show everyone what efficient systems exist in India. No doubt the Indian judiciary is doing a marvelous job these days, and Judge Kode knows far better than myself. However, I feel sad for Sanjay Dutt, especially when people with hard core criminal backgrounds are walking free around us, or sometimes even representing 'We the people of India' in the political systems.
It is very easy to say 'he deserved it, or he is reaping what he sowed' but those who say this, can they really vouch for themselves. Can they say that are the best citizens who abide with each and every law stated. Don't they cheat the govt. by hiding their incomes so as to pay less taxes, don't they cheat their employers by using the phones for personal use, don't they cheat by bribing officers whether it is for flouting the traffic rules or building norms etc.
Sanjay Dutt has not done so heinous a crime that people should hate him to the extent of wanting maximum punishment that can be meted out. He did something wrong and got punishment for that through the Law. But just because he is a very well known actor, and he should be made a shining example to those who dare to mess with the law of the country, is not correct. What right do you have to make him a shining example. Why not go after the terrorists, the goons, and the underworld people to set such examples?
RE:Shining example??????
by Nitin Dutt on Jul 31, 2007 03:25 PM Permalink
why are so supportiv of Sanjay dutt, yes we not be able to vouch for us also but does it mean that whatever we are doing is antinational. You never know what reaction your actions might have. But distributing weapons that too state of art is a crime and he was not so innocent at that time that he would'nt have known that these weapons are not for donation at siddhi vinayak but for killing ppl. One day you will loose someone in such a blast and will you that day support the person who kept the weapons at his place to be used later by goons/terrorist.
RE:Shining example??????
by on Jul 31, 2007 03:38 PM Permalink
the intention was not of distributing. He was youn g lad of 34 and most boys or men of that, if they have the means would like to be a little adventourous. Thats what i said that he did something wrong and got punished for it. 2 yrs, 3 yrs, or 6 yrs, the merits or the de-merits of the case has to be decided by the judge. All I am saying that there is not need to stress that he be the scape goat and made an example to deter people from committing crime. Go after the damn underworld guys or the J&K terrorists ya!
RE:RE:Shining example??????
by Satyajit Mahapatra on Jul 31, 2007 03:50 PM Permalink
34 is not a young lad. I would call it an age where he should have matured. 25 is considered the age of maturity and he was 9 years past that. You can not make discrimination like Sanjay Dutt matured at 40 and Salman khan will mature at 50 ;-) and hence can commit crime
RE:Shining example??????
by Satyajit Mahapatra on Jul 31, 2007 03:47 PM Permalink
I think his judgement just says "law is above everybody". Agreed that there are many criminals roamimg around scot free. But the day they can be caught and some evidence available against them they will also get the justice. Quite possible Dutt was repentant after commiting the crime (and possibly that's why he got 6 instead of 10 years) but if you let somebody free for yesterday's crime, today's criminals will be encouraged. He might be a misguided and unlucky youth that time but law should be same for everybody. In last two years Indian judicial system has given many commendable judgement which would certainly discourag the high and mighty to participate or encourage criminal activities. It will interesting to see what happens to Arjun Singh!
