Actor Sanjay Dutt had 'nexus' with Anees Ibrahim, brother of prime accused fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim, but there is no evidence to connect him with 1993 Mumbai blasts conspiracy, special TADA judge Pramod Kode has said in his judgment which convicted the Bollywood star.
Dutt was sentenced to six years rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act by the court for the illegal possession of an AK-56 rifle and pistol by the TADA court. However, the court had acquitted him under TADA.
Dutt received his copy of the judgment on Monday.
'It is true that the matters from the confession of A-117 (Dutt) amongst others also reveal of him knowing Anees or Anees visiting the shooting of the film Yalgaar or other places of stay of the shooting party,' Judge Kode has noted in his judgment.
'Thus, the said matters though sufficient to reveal existence of some nexus between A-117 and Anees, still the said material cannot be stretched far enough to come to the conclusion that the weapons were received or handed over to A-117 because of the relationship,' the court has observed.
The court also absolved Dutt of the charge of conspiracy stating that when the actor received the arms the main conspirators had not effected the landing at Shekhadi in Raigad where the explosives for the blasts had arrived in the country.
The judgment also noted that the conspiracy was finalised at a meeting in Dubai on March 5, 1993 much after Dutt had received the arms.
While acquitting him under the stringent TADA, the court has relied on the 1995 Supreme Court judgment, which stated that the unauthorised possession of weapons would attract the sections of TADA only 'if such a possession is for the purposes of the commission of terrorist acts.'
The court noted that despite having the weapons the actor had at no point used them for any terrorist activity.
'The prosecution evidence has also failed to establish that three AK-56 rifles, its ammunitions or 9 mm pistol and its ammunition and hand grenades were part of the consignment smuggled into the country by Dawood Ibrahim and his associates,' the court observed while acquitting Dutt of section 3 (3) of TADA, deals with the commission of terrorist acts.
The court has disregarded the prosecution's argument that Dutt had kept the AK-56 rifle to commit a terrorist act.
Noting 'different human beings do behave in different manner in similar set of circumstances,' the court observed, 'merely because A-117 (Dutt) had opted to have another such type of weapon for the protection due to himself having felt the necessity of the same, though may appear to be absurd to others, cannot said to be a circumstance for accepting such a submission...'
However, while acquitting Dutt under TADA, the court noted that by keeping in the weapons in his possession he was guilty under the Arms Act.
The court's observations have been opposed by special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam."By keeping the weapons in a TADA notified area, he violated certain sections and I will be advising the CBI on appealing against the acquittal under TADA," he said.
