1993 Mumbai blasts: Sanjay Dutt's fate to be decided tomorrow
- Tera Gurdip bach gaya: Indian on death row in Indonesia tells wife in phone call
- Pune building collapses, at least nine dead
- Mehbooba: Sacrifice of children won’t go waste; securitymen had no idea they were targeting Burhan
- 'Voodoo statistics!' P Chidambaram rejects Arun Jaitley's inflation remarks
- Senior Congress leader Capt Ajay Yadav to quit party
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.
- The amended act legalises child labour while claiming to do the opposite
- The concept of private members’ bill is central to a deliberative democracy
- Mahasweta Devi drew imaginary landscapes to narrate stories of the oppressed
- With the latest figures on industrial output, the case for a stimulus is pressing
- An open letter to new students entering Jawaharlal Nehru University
- Irom Sharmila calling off her fast against the AFSPA reflects the state’s failure to engage