Law and justice are equal for all. If he got convicted, he should have to be punished as per law. Law is meant to make someone realize his fault and let other learn from his mistakes.
RE:What LAW meant?
by ashok singh on May 16, 2007 12:31 PM Permalink
I think he is definitely guilty of keeping the weapons. Also I believe he never knew the extent of damage his collaboration with the terrorists can cause. But not knowing the law is no excuse of being pardoned. He has to be punished. But we have to reform the concept of punishment. Punishment shud be to make the person realise that he has done wrong, but at the same time try to channel that guilt for the good of society which he has contributed in harming (or destroying if u like). Punishment leading to just destruction of the person pained by the guilty deed is of no use.
RE:What LAW meant?
by Ramanath Babu on May 16, 2007 02:30 PM Permalink
When Sanjay Dutt was arrested under TADA, the star turned politician Shatrughnan Sinha was asked to comment. Although he is a BJP member, Sinha said he cannot even in his dream imagine that Sanjay is a terrorist since he does not know ABCD of politics. To make his point, he further said that if you ask Sanajy who is the Prime Minister of India, he would probably name as Madhuri Dixit. Such was his political knowledge.
It is fact that post Mumbai blasts, Mumbai police failed to protect the common men and there were alround tension in the entire city. Sajay in his wisdom prefer to obtain a weapon, may be due to fear factor for himself and his family. Possessing weapon is no doubt is an offence. But by booking him under TADA the police has not done justice to him. It was only to cover up their inefficiency they booked him under TADA.
