Amid
a growing clamour for his clemency, an emotional 53-year-old Dutt broke
his silence after the Apex Court upheld his conviction under the Arms
Act on March 21 and gave him four weeks time to surrender.
"All I can tell you is I have not applied for pardon," said Dutt with sister and Congress MP Priya Dutt by his side at his brief media interaction during which he did not take any questions.
"There are many other people who deserve pardon. I want to tell with folded hands to the media, the honourable citizens of the country that when I am not going for pardon then there can be no debate about it," said Dutt.
The actor said he had the highest respect for the Supreme Court and will abide by all terms and conditions put forth by it.
"The honourable Supreme Court has given me time to surrender and I will surrender in that time," he said as Priya comforted him.
As Dutt has already served 18 months in jail, he would have to undergo imprisonment for three-and-a-half-years.
"I am shattered and
this is the tough time in my life. With folded hands I request the media
and citizens let me be at peace," he said.
Dutt was ordered by the apex court to return to prison to complete a five-year sentence after it reduced the original six-year term awarded by a TADA court which convicted him for possessing illegal firearms.
The actor had been jailed in 2005 for six years for the gun charges but only served 18 months before being released in 2007 on bail.
"These are very, very tough times in my life and in our lives. I want to thank everybody who supported us and me. I just want to tell everyone from the media that I have got very few days left and I want to finish all my work. I also have to spend time with my family," Dutt said.
It was for the first
time that Dutt has ventured out of his house in suburban Bandra since
the Supreme Court verdict. He made the remarks before leaving for a film
shoot.
"I love my country and its citizens. I love India," he said.
Katju says he will seek pardon for Sanjay Dutt
Notwithstanding actor
Sanjay Dutt's statement that he would not apply for mercy, Press Council
of India (PCI) chairman Justice (retd) Markandey Katju on Thursday said
that he would still go ahead and seek pardon for Dutt and 1993 Mumbai
blasts case convict Zaibunnisa.
Asked about the
Bollywood actor's statement that he would not apply for mercy, Katju
said, "That makes no difference to me, I am going to apply for pardon to
the President and to the Governor (of Maharashtra). I think he (Dutt)
and Zaibunnissa both deserve pardon."
On what grounds he was
demanding pardon, Katju said that "public good is one of them, there can
be many other considerations like humanitarian considerations for grant
of pardon."
"If you study the
Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution, they do not state that who can
appeal. Section 72 provides power to the President to pardon and section
166 to the governor," he said.
"But both sections do
not state that who can appeal and it is not written on what grounds
pardons can be given. There could be thousands of ground for pardon," he
added.
Katju also said that he had issued his appeal for Dutt without having interacted or spoken to the actor.
"I have not talked to
Sanjay Dutt, I have not contacted him, he has not approached me. In my
first appeal which I issued for pardon, I did it without contacting
him," he said.
Dutt, 53, was ordered
by the Supreme Court on March 21 to return to jail to complete a
five-year sentence while woman convict 70-year-old Zaibunnisa Anwar
Kazi's five-year imprisonment was confirmed by the apex court in the
1993 Mumbai blasts case.
Katju said, "I came to
know about punishment awarded to him (Dutt) through TV. After that I
went through the judgement and I felt that he has been socially
boycotted for five years, it took five to six years for him to restore
his career".
"No producer offered
him film. (There were) no bank loans for him and every time he needed to
seek court's permission before going on foreign trips," he said.
The PCI chief said that Dutt was married and had two kids.
"In those twenty years he has not done anything wrong. There could be some humanitarian perspective," Katju said.
He also said that normally the order of the President and a governor is not subject to judiciary review
Comments
Post a Comment