Without Fear, With Favour

But again, the timing of the leak is besides the point. More pertinent from a legal point of view is the question: How on earth could the police sit on all this with a tape so explosive? Whether Dutt is a victim (as suggested by his supporters) or a culprit is something that can be established only in the course of a trial. So, why did they not book Dutt under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) immediately after the interception in 2000? MCOCA, a forerunner to POTA, is the first law anywhere in the country to make telephone interceptions admissible as evidence. The police did play the tape last week in an MCOCA court but that case has, at least as of now, nothing to do with Dutt. It is against film producer Bharat Shah and the tape of Dutt’s conversation with Shakeel was reportedly produced as evidence to establish generally the film industry’s nexus with the underworld.

The failure of the police to take any action against Dutt himself despite such damning evidence suggests that, far from being persecuted, he is receiving preferential treatment from the police. And this is not the first time the star has been considered more equal than others. The earlier occasion was on October 16, 1995, when he was granted bail in the Bombay blast case after being in jail for 16 months. The Supreme Court’s order granting him bail was extraordinary. TADA forbade bail unless the court had reasonable grounds to believe that the accused was not guilty. But Dutt got bail not because the court discovered any deficiency in evidence but because the CBI suddenly changed its mind about keeping him in detention. Thus, on the basis of an executive whim, the apex court overruled its own earlier judgment which held that Dutt could not be released till he proved his innocence in the course of the trial.

The change in the CBI’s stand came against the backdrop of a nationwide campaign by Dutt’s supporters projecting him as a symbol of the abuse of TADA. The campaign was so effective that Bal Thackeray was forced to intervene and direct the then Shiv Sena government in Maharashtra to drop the TADA charges against Dutt. But, in the event, the Narasimha Rao government was prepared to accommodate Dutt only to the extent of letting him get bail. It was on the Centre’s review that the Supreme Court released Dutt in October 1995, saying ‘‘the fact-situation’’ then was ‘‘entirely different’’ from what it was a year ago, when it had rejected his bail application. The ‘‘fact-situation’’ was a euphemism for the special favour that was shown to Dutt by the judiciary and the executive. The inaction on the telephone interception shows that Dutt continues to lead a charmed life.