Sympathy for Sanjay Dutt is understandable but not ultimately relevant. An actor whose recent films helped redefine Bollywood’s cinematic idiom now finds himself headed for a long prison term. Dutt, let’s be perfectly frank, was no ordinary accused. But Dutt’s crime, let’s recognise, was not ordinary either. Misspent youth, basic good nature, the subtext of a tragic ‘hero’ — none of this can be allowed to legally explain possession of illegally procured lethal weapons courtesy shady suppliers. For those who obssessively track celebrities and view the world through them, let’s remember Paris Hilton spent jail time for a fairly routine drunk driving charge. Roman Polanski, a fine film director, had to flee to escape American justice. No matter how many cameras beat down on the defendant, no matter how much primetime coverage is accorded to the person in the dock, the custodians of the law should, ideally, go about their ordained task. So Justice P.D. Kode passed the test. The high-voltage media coverage — or indeed the crores of film industry money riding on Dutt — were irrelevant in the face of two foundational principles: respect for the law and equality before the law. The judge did recognise that Dutt was no terrorist and his crime could not be construed as “anti-social, ghastly, inhuman” and that he did not cause any harm to the general public. But the illegal possession of a 9 mm pistol and an AK-56 rifle constituted an “eminently dangerous act”. The law has no meaning if those committing eminently dangerous acts do not face the consequences. The judge drawing attention to the potential of perpetrating violence is important. Even those who argue that Dutt’s sentence is far too harsh would do well to recognise it.Celebrities facing reverses of this kind evoke varied responses. Some would argue that there is a cultural incentive in undermining public figures who are widely cherished and believe that they are being treated unfairly because they happen to be celebrities. Others delight in the humiliation of people who appear to be a cut above the rest. Here neither response would be justified. In the case of Sanjay Dutt, the law has taken its course. No more, no less.
