The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its order on actor Sanjay Dutt's plea -- who is seeking suspension of his conviction in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case to contest the Lok Sabha elections as the Samajwadi Party's candidate from Lucknow.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan reserved the order after hearing contentions of Dutt's counsel and the Central Bureau of Investigation, which opposed his plea.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for Dutt, contended that the actor was convicted under the Arms Act solely on his confessional statement and that he was absolved of serious charges under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act.
Pleading for the suspension of the conviction, Salve further said the TADA court had held that Dutt was not involved in any conspiracy in the blasts case.
The CBI opposed the plea, saying that the conviction was not only based on the confessional statement but the court's findings were based on recoveries, disclosures and corroborative evidences.
"No case can be made out to stay his conviction. It is not a case entirely based on confession but supported by disclosures, recoveries and corroboration of evidences," Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium asserted.
"The conviction under Arms Act cannot be oversighted," Subramanium said, opposing Salve's submission that the 50-year-old actor was absolved of serious offences under TADA, including entering into conspiracy with other accused in the March 1993 Mumbai blasts case.
Salve contended that there was no reason to put up hurdles for the actor, who was convicted only once, in entering public life and his family antecedents should be taken into account to stay his conviction.
He said Dutt had possessed arms as he feared a threat to the life of his father late Sunil Dutt and other members of his family after the January 1993 riots. Dutt sought suspension of the conviction on the grounds considered by the apex court while staying the conviction of Bharatiya Janata Party leader Navjot Singh Sidhu in a road rage case.
However, CBI opposed the contention, saying the case of cricketer-turned-politician stood on a different footing as he was acquitted by the trial court before it was overturned by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Subramanium said the CBI was also opposing Dutt's plea on the principle laid in the Representation of People's Act that under section 8(3) prohibits a person sentenced to two years imprisonment from contesting the elections.
"The statutory law (election law) strictly puts a bar on convicted persons from contesting elections," ASG said, adding that the power of the court to stay the conviction has to be exercised rarely.
CBI was joined by several residents from Lucknow in opposing Dutt's plea, with their lawyers contending that relief by the apex court would lead to the 'whole spectre' of criminals getting into public office. Senior advocates Soli Sorabjee, K T S Tulsi and advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the residents, submitted that allowing convicted persons to contest elections would strengthen criminalisation of politics which the apex court itself had tried to prevent.
"If a person is convicted and not allowed to contest election there is no violation of fundamental right," Sorabjee said. Tulsi said any relief in the case would lead to a rush of petitions by criminals and the battle to clean public office of criminals would be defeated. Dutt in his petition contended that his conduct during the trial should be considered for granting him relief like cricketer-turned-politician Navjot Singh Sidhu.
The apex court had on January 23, 2007 stayed the conviction and the three-year sentence of Sidhu in a road rage case, paving way for him to contest the Amritsar Lok Sabha by-poll, after he resigned in the wake of the Punjab and Haryana High Court holding him guilty of the offence.
Dutt, who was sentenced to a six-year jail term on July 31, 2007, had spent 18 months in jail before the commencement of the trial. He was arrested on April 19, 1993 and his confessional statement was recorded by the police on April 24.
He was first granted bail on May 5, 1993 but was rearrested on July 4 same year and remained in jail till October 16, 1995. Dutt filed an appeal in the apex court against his November 28, 2006 conviction.
The court granted him bail on November 27, 2007. Dutt was convicted under the Arms Act for possession of an AK-56 rifle, a 9 mm pistol and grenades given by co-accused Abu Salem before the Mumbai blasts.
