More time for Sanju not fair: Mumbaikars

Sanjay Dutt should not have asked for more time to surrender, as he has already been found guilty. The reason - he wants time to complete his films - he gave to seek an extension is unacceptable. By working in films he is not doing charity for people; he is not going to donate the money to those who lost their relatives in 1993 blasts. - Hemant Parab, sales executive

If you look at the families of the victims of the blast, their loss is irreparable. Though Sanjay Dutt is a star and has served 18 months of his sentence, giving him an extension of another four weeks was unnecessary. He has already been out on bail for a long time and now he should have served his term without any excuses. How can the law bend itself for Bollywood stars when it is supposed to be equal for all? - Deepika Sahu, analyst with a private firm

Dutt was well aware of the consequences of his actions while he sheltered weapons in his house. The court had given the judgment in 2007, sentencing him to prison. How can he ask for an extension on the pretext of crores of rupees invested in his films? - Wilson Rode, working with a private firm

Just because he is a celebrity, a month of extension is not fair. His few film projects are not above the law, or anything important. I feel he deserves to be behind bars like the other culprits, as the work he has done deserves severe punishment. - Dakshin Adyanthaya, social media professional

I do not favour any form of discrimination. I am against the decision to grant him an extension. I wonder if a common man would have been granted such privileges. - Abhinay Hatey, photographer

I seriously don’t know why many people are seeking pardon for Dutt. Had Dutt surrendered on the very first day after the court upheld his sentence, it would have sent a strong, positive message out to the people. By demanding more time to surrender, he has proved that he does not regret what he did. - Mamta Bangera, working with a private firm

A crime is a crime. Law should be same for all, be it a politician, an actor or a peon. If Dutt is convicted, he has to serve the sentence immediately and not be given more time. - Manish Gadia, working with a private firm

He should not have been given time to surrender as it sends a wrong signal to the public. - Jheel Chheda, working with a private firm

I believe that any judgment by the apex court should be justified and similar for all. What would a common man have done if he were convicted for the same reason? Irrespective of who the convict is, law should be equal for all. - Guncha Khare, Manager, Bombay Connect

By giving time to him to surrender, a wrong message has gone out in public. If such things keep happening, people will lose faith in the judicial system. - Ganesh Bhosale, working with a private firm

(By Naveen Nair and Chetna Yerunkar)

You May Like



    Leave a Reply