1993 Mumbai blasts: Sanjay Dutt's fate to be decided tomorrow


The Supreme Court verdict on 1993 Mumbai blasts tomorrow will be keenly watched by Bollywood as fate of one of its superstars Sanjay Dutt, who was sentenced to six year jail term by a TADA court, will be decided.

The apex court will pronounce its verdict on a bunch of appeals and cross-appeals filed by and against 100 people including Dutt who were convicted by the special TADA court in 2006.

Having already spent 18 months behind bars during the trial, Dutt, 53, would have to undergo the rest of the sentence if the Supreme Court upholds the TADA court's verdict.

The actor was convicted in November 2006 for illegal possession of a 9mm pistol and an AK-56 rifle but was acquitted of more serious charges of criminal conspiracy under the now defunct anti-terror TADA.

After a marathon 10-month-long hearing beginning November 1, 2011, the Supreme Court had in August 2012 reserved its verdict on appeals and cross-appeals in the 1993 Mumbai serial terror bombing case in which 257 people were killed and 713 were injured.

During the hearing, the bench had for the first time used laptops in the court to peruse the voluminous documents and record of the case and the submissions of various counsel.

On March 12, 1993, Mumbai was rocked by a series of blasts, engineered by fundamentalist elements, which also damaged property worth over Rs 27 crore.

Please read our terms of use before posting comments
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
comments powered by Disqus