Sunjay Dutt vs State : case analysis

December 18, 2022

This article is written by Shubham Singh, law undergrad at Savitribai Phule Pune University.

This article has been published by Sneha Mahawar.​​ 


The popular entertainer Sanjay Dutt had served a prison season of 5 years in the wake of being condemned for detainment because of his supposed contribution to the 1993 Mumbai sequential shoot case by the C.B.I. otherwise called the Focal Department of Examination, Bombay.

The Walk 19, 1993 Mumbai Impact case depended on a progression of 12 bomb impacts that occurred in Mumbai on Spring twelfth. These assaults were really organized and are as yet known as one of the most terrible and the most damaging bomb shoots throughout the entire existence of India. Besides, this was the principal finely organized sequential bomb blast on a worldwide level. This article rides through every one of the parts of the case Sunjay Datt vs State on 9 September 1994.

Brief of the case

Facts of the case

As per The Constitution Of India 1949, the TADA Act which is completely explained as the Fearmonger and Troublesome Exercises (Counteraction) Act demonstrates a murky however fairly clear significance of what the demonstration could state. The TADA Act expresses that :

Punishment & measures under the TADA Act:

Section 3, TADA Act Punishment for terrorist activities 

Any individual who is blamed for being the individual who will in general dismay the laws of a nation and upset the country’s tranquility by stirring things up around town spots of the country by fear, for example,

• Wrecking property;

• Murdering people;

• Dynamites;

• Bombs;

• Guns;

• Rifles;

• Poisonous chemical.


They can without much of a stretch become the justification behind death and are considered offenses under this demonstration.
The punishments that fall under ‘punishment for terrorists’ are:

Section 3(2)(i) TADA Act

In the abovementioned exercises leading to the demise of an individual, the lawbreaker will be either condemned to death or will get a sentence of life detainment. The guilty party might possibly be responsible for a fine.

Section 3(2)(ii) TADA Act

This relies upon the gravity of the wrongdoing however on the off chance that the wrongdoing carried out isn’t as need might arise to be condemned to death, then, at that point, the crook will be given a sentence of detainment of something like 5 years which can be extended to life detainment.

Section 4 TADA Act punishment 

Any individual who chooses to connive in endeavors to help or deliberately finance the troublesome exercises will confront a prison time sentence of something like 5 years which can be extended up to life detainment and the wrongdoer should pay a fine alongside the prison time as well.

Section 5 TADA Act punishment 

This part explicitly centers around the ownership of any arms, ammo, or weapons with a cognizant brain. In the event that any individual has any sort of unlawful weapons or arms will be viewed as a criminal under this segment of the TADA Act.

Plan 1 of the Arms Act, 1962 notices that on the off chance that an individual having accompanying arms that aren’t formally endorsed should confront prison season of no less than 5 years which might extend up to life detainment and the crook should pay a fine as well.

Related laws

Sanjay Dutt was charged with the following:


This pursuit was stripped later on as the C.B.I., as well as the High Court, neglected to lay out the grounds of intrigue.

Section 3(3) of the Terrorist and disruptive 

This pursuit was stripped later on as the C.B.I., as well as the High Court, neglected to lay out the grounds for the expectation of supporting and conspiring with the fearmongers or the psychological oppressor movement that occurred in Mumbai.

Section 5 of the terrorist and disruptive 

In view of the initial feeling, the applicant was expressed as not liable. The justification for the ownership of the arms and ammo wasn’t laid out which would have demonstrated his immediate association with the fear-monger exercises referenced previously.

Section 3 and 7 of the Arms Act, 1959 + Section 25 (1-A) and (1-B) of the Arms Act, 1959

The solicitor was seen as a real fault for having unlawful weapons intentionally. The charges he was at last different with estimates a sentence of at least five to a decade.


The usually known assertion ‘Lady Justice is blind’ probably won’t work constantly however there are situations where the courts have given equity and discipline to the meriting individuals. Sanjay Dutt, who is a Bollywood entertainer needed to confront a ton of prison time for his activities. He needed to confront prison time even subsequent to having an extremely impressive impact as his insurance was his dad Sunil Dutt who was an individual from the Parliament of India in 1993. Despite the fact that different discussions emerged since the court stripped the charges of the TADA Act from Sanjay Dutt and just condemned him as a guilty party for having unapproved arms and ammo, many think that the court was paid off to ease off of the solicitor as he was from an exceptionally great foundation. Some past nepotism generally will, in general, impede the equity framework. Nobody is certain regardless of whether it is genuine yet this pointer can’t be ignored.

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:


Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.

Exit mobile version