Tamil film "Jai Bheem" is receiving praise across the country for its serious and inspiring portrayal of police harassment against marginalized tribal communities. The courtroom drama is based on a real-life case handled by former Madras High Court judge Justice K Chandru during his days as a litigation lawyer. The film has focused on Justice Chandru, who is known for his activism and progressive decisions.
Question: The film is about the real-life case of Rajkannu-Parvati, which involved the brutal custodial death of a member of the Irula tribe. Your efforts as a lawyer ensured justice to the helpless widow of Rajkannu and ensured punishment for the guilty police officers. But in our country, the process of torture in police custody continues unabated. The gruesome custodial killings of Jayaraj and Benix last year shook the conscience of the entire nation. Even during the lockdown, we saw a huge increase in police harassment cases across the country. Why do you think police atrocities continue, despite several judgments and directions by the courts to discipline the police force? What drives the police officers to indulge in such inhuman acts? Is there something fundamentally and inherently wrong with our policing?
Answer: As the movie showed that it was based on the real cause of Rajkannu who was from the Irula tribe but in reality, he belonged to the Kurva community which is yet to be declared an ST community. The film director with his creative literary authority transformed the film with the canvas of the Irula community (ST) and the innumerable atrocities faced by them. In that process, he took the victims as representatives of the Irula community and exposed their lifestyle, food habits, their habitat etc. to the outsiders.
DK 11 guidelines passed by the Supreme Court in Basu v State of West Bengal (1997 (1) SCC 416) were issued with regard to the rights of the pre-trial accused. In that case, the Supreme Court also allowed contempt proceedings against disobeying police officers and judicial magistrates who did not comply. Even though more than 24 years have passed, hardly anyone has been found guilty of contempt till now.
The reason for the indiscipline of the police force lies in its colonial origins. Here in Tamil Nadu, we are still governed by the Madras City Police Act of the year 1888. By maintaining law and order, they have not progressed scientifically in the matter of crime detection. Even in the pre-independence days, the British had divided the country into different regions and had different systems of administration. In addition, they also enacted the Criminal Tribes Act, under which many tribal communities were included. Detection of a crime by this process is not necessary, because if any crime is committed in an area all tribals will become suspicious and those who do not surrender before the circle police station within 24 hours will be treated as accused.
There was a long struggle along with the independence movement to repeal this act, but it came only after the country got independence. The repeal of the Criminal Tribes Act did not free the tribals from oppression. On the other hand, Denotified Tribes (DNTs) remained suspicious in the eyes of the police for any crime committed in their area. Only a few non-notified tribes, due to their upward mobilization, were able to take possession of the land, gained all civil rights, and became an inclusive group.
On the other hand, most of the tribes are considered potential criminals, and false cases are registered against them day by day. They do not have leases for their house sites, their names are not included in the electoral rolls, they are not included in the Public Distribution System. Due to the nomadic lifestyle, they do not even send their children to regular schools. The employment prospects are largely in the non-formal sectors. All these are beautifully depicted in this film. In the first scene, though they were released from jail, policemen were waiting to book them in other unsolved crimes of their areas. Therefore, what is needed is behavioral change in the police force and the use of advanced scientific techniques in crime detection. With these steps, more tribal people will be part of an inclusive society and also the planning system of the government will have to focus on their basic problems.
Question: Generally, commercial films glorify police violence as bravery. The public celebrates the trigger happy encounter, as seen in the Hyderabad encounter. "Jai Bhim" is notable in its attempt to highlight the brutal side of police violence from the point of view of helpless victims. Do you think such films will encourage the general public to have a more realistic understanding of the police system and encourage them to take more accountability from the police than to celebrate their excesses as heroic?
Answers: Certainly, films like Jai Bhim reveal the understanding of the police force and the court system. In most cases, the justice delivery system is largely delayed. If the criminals are punished on time, the trust of the victims and the masses in the judiciary will increase.
Question: You were involved in political activism from your student life, and continued your association with left-politics even during your legal practice. Do you feel that your political activism helped you understand the problems of the general public better as a lawyer and later as a judge? Do you think advocates should not be apolitical? Is it necessary for judges to have strong political awareness?
Answer: I was associated with the Left movement for almost 20 years. I had the roles of a student worker, a full-time worker, a trade union worker, and a party worker. The experience I had gained during this process of political activities had given me sufficient insight into the working of the system and gave me sufficient understanding to work as an advocate or handle the bench as a judge. I don't think anyone can be apolitical in political democracy and a correct understanding of politics is a necessary foundation to strengthen political democracy. If a lawyer understands politics, it will be easier for him to understand the working of law and the political machine that operates the law. Similarly, a judge who is ignorant of the political situation is likely to be misled in many cases, especially about the background.
Question: Have the cases handled by you as a lawyer revealed any pattern in the cases of police violence whereby only certain communities are targeted and victims? Do you think that state-sponsored violence does not operate in a vacuum but perpetuates existing hierarchical inequalities and social prejudices?
Answer: My handling of human rights matters certainly shows the true character of the state and how violent a machine it is. Organized violence perpetrated by uniformed forces has a definite pattern and was to subdue to the already marginalized and vulnerable and will certainly perpetuate existing inequalities and prejudices.
Question: There is an interesting scene in the film where Advocate Chandru defies the call for a boycott of the court to argue the case of tribal youth who was illegally detained. Other advocates are shown not appreciating his decision to attend the hearing. Before the Supreme Court condemned the court boycott, you defied the call for boycotts to attend court hearings in the 1990s. It was a bold and powerful statement of yours that courts are not for lawyers but for litigants. Recently, the Supreme Court has taken this practice of court-boycott seriously and issued a contempt notice to a bar association for calling for a strike. What are your thoughts in this regard? Should advocates think of alternative means of grievance redressal instead of court-boycott?
Answer: From the year 1976, the year I enrolled, I was a lawyer-activist who led several lawyers' movements of Madras High Court. Many court boycotts, dharnas, and processions were taken out by me. I was also an elected member of the Bar Council from 1983 to 1988. I was also an office-bearer of the Madras High Court Advocates Association and the founding secretary of the Labor Law Practitioners Association. I was the Tamil Nadu General Secretary of the All India Lawyers Association for some time.
However, the continued boycott of the courts became counterproductive and deprived the litigants of their rights to approach the courts even without the help of lawyers. The monopoly status given to the legal profession prevented any other social worker from approaching the court on behalf of the underprivileged and weaker sections. After nearly two decades of practice, I have realized that lawyers' strikes have become counter-productive and highly sensitive, and even harmful to the future of the legal profession. Therefore, I declare publicly that courts are for litigants and not lawyers. If lawyers want their grievances to be resolved, they can protest in other ways without closing the courts and without resorting to the law to resolve their problems. The matter was probably not taken well by the Bar. I started appearing in courts even during the period of boycott, especially when there are cases related to human rights violations. When I publicly wrote an article in the Indian Express against the court boycott during the CPC amendments, I was also fired from the association I once headed. After that, there was no looking back. Once I filed a writ petition against the Bar Council calling for a strike and got an injunction. After my elevation to the bench, a matter related to setting up a standing committee to resolve differences between lawyers and police came up before me and the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice asked me to write the order and I traced the origin and details of the various boycotts by the advocates of Tamil Nadu in my order. I also constituted a high-level standing committee to resolve disputes so that boycott could be avoided.
When I met Chief Justice A.P. Shah for his signature, he asked me after reading that from where did I get such a detailed description of the various strikes. I told him that I was the author behind those strikes and that the judgment I had written was a kind of retribution for my past sins. He laughed and agreed with me to sign the order. Though we had constituted a committee to resolve the dispute, to date none of the lawyers associations has filed any complaint and the committee is only on paper.
This metamorphosis of my thinking was not in 1993 but the director of the film wanted to show the real character of Vakil Chandru to be recorded and brought in that particular scene. In the film, Suriya was shown acting as a lawyer, who jumped over a barricade to attend a court case involving a tribal man who had left the lawyers' movement site. The lawyers show displeasure and even shout at him. Despite this, he goes to court and obtains orders for the victim. At the same time, he was also wearing a white bandage in his hand, which shows that the lawyers are protesting. Even as a judge, I had refused to hear any petition filed by the lawyers' union during the boycott period and had made a condition that the court would not hear the matter until the strike action was withdrawn. I am proud that at least a small part of the bar has now realized what I have been saying for the past 25 years.
Question: In the movie, there is a scene where Advocate Chandru is remarking at a school function "All important leaders like Gandhi and Nehru are here. How is Ambedkar alone not here?" Sadly, Ambedkar's ideas are rarely discussed in our school and college syllabus, even in law colleges. Do you think that exposing students to Dr.Ambedkar at a very young age can help them become better citizens with progressive ideas and social commitment?
Answer: I strongly feel that leaders like Ambedkar were not adequately exposed to the public and especially to the students. Textbooks show him differently and most people understand him as the leader of the Scheduled Castes and not as the architect of the Indian Constitution. To change this skewed history, it has to be brought to the school children in an objective manner. I myself got many new ideas by reading selected works of Dr. Ambedkar and I was able to use them whenever any matter related to religion and caste came to my notice. After my retirement, I collected these cases and wrote a book on the background of these cases and titled the book "My Judgment in the Light of Ambedkar". It is a pity that in law colleges do not give Ambedkar's writings as reading material even in pre-law days.
Question: In the Rajkannu case, you helped set a new precedent in habeas corpus jurisdiction by persuading the High Court to allow cross-examination of witnesses. You cited the precedent of the Kerala High Court in the Rajan case. This case showed the power of habeas corpus jurisdiction in securing the most cherished fundamental right of individual liberty. However, recently we see a recurring trend of declining habeas corpus jurisdiction of the Court citing technical reasons. In Kashmir captive cases, we saw Supreme Court also giving up its role. what do you think of this?
Answer: Habeas Corpus is one of the possible weapons in the hands of the common man, who can use it to get rid of imprisonment if oppressed by the state or by any vested interest. Due to the detailed explanation given by Justice Krishna Iyer, the concept of habeas corpus has been broadened. A look at the Sunil Batra II case shows that habeas corpus can be used not only to release certain bodies under forced confinement but also to reform the prison conditions of prisoners. Perception may be one answer. Unfortunately, after 40 years of such detailed interpretations by eminent jurists like Krishna Iyer, Chinnappa Reddy in the early 80s, people still struggle to get orders from the courts. In the recent experience of those detained under the Kashmir Security Act, even the Supreme Court was delaying the passing of orders and cases without any speedy resolution. Mehbooba's daughter had to seek permission from the Supreme Court to meet her mother in Srinagar. CPM leader Sitaram Yechury had to take permission in court to meet his party MLA Tarigami. Many cases of Jammu and Kashmir are yet to be heard in the Supreme Court of this country. All of this has reduced the power of habeas corpus petitions and their effectiveness in delivering justice.
Question: Generally, the film highlights Ambedkar's motto "Educate, Organize and Agitate". But these days we are witnessing a shrinking space to express dissatisfaction, with more clout on NGOs and protest movements. It was through social workers that Rajkannu's case reached you. But 'activism' is seen as a dangerous activity these days, and we see calls for Sedition and UAPA against social workers. what do you think of this?
Answer: The detention of 13 intellectuals under the UAPA in the Bhima Koregaon case for the last 3 years actually shows the weakness of the judicial system and the power of an autocratic government. The film, which portrays Ambedkar's famous quote "Educate, organize and agitate" is only meant to emphasize that people belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes should become literate so that their self-respect and dignity are guaranteed. So in the first phase of the film, the tribal woman was shown putting her thumb impression instead of signing the court petition. In contrast, at the end of the film, his daughter confidently sat in a chair in front of the lawyer and was reading a newspaper. The message was that such people are getting an educated understanding that literacy is the only way they can progress. But the problem in our country is that the highly educated literates are failing the country either by their apathy or by the autocratic actions of the state.
Question: We have published the review of the film, which was written by a law student. We are getting messages from many law students that they feel inspired to take up litigation and help the downtrodden after seeing your story on screen. Do you have any messages for them?
Answer: I am glad that apart from the story of the film, and after seeing the protagonist (actor) lawyer succeed in the courts, there are many youngsters who want to take law practice seriously. I also heard from the last students at the neighborhood school that they were going to attend law school next year. My only message to the young lawyers is that they should be thoroughly trained and use the skills for the betterment of the underprivileged.
Story Edited by Jinit Parmar
You can also join our WhatsApp group to get premium and selected news of The Mooknayak on WhatsApp. Click here to join the WhatsApp group.