Recently, Justice K Chandru, who inspired Suriya’s character in the Tamil film ‘Jai Bheem’, shared his experience of the judicial system in fighting for the underprivileged.
Jai Bheem, a Tamil film directed by TJ Gyanvel, featuring a legal drama actor surya In the lead role, a woman from the Irula tribal community brings to life Sengani’s struggle for justice.
Read also | Get ‘First Day First Show’ our weekly newsletter from the world of cinema delivered to your inbox. You can subscribe here for free
Sengani’s husband Rajkannu has been arrested by the police on false charges of theft. When he goes missing, the police claim that he has fled. With the help of lawyer Chandru, played by Suriya, Sangani files a habeas corpus Petition and so the story unfolds.
The film is based on true events of a case that took place in Vriddhachalam, which was dealt with by Justice K Chandru in 1993, when he was practicing as an advocate. Justice Chandru, retired from the Madras High Court and who now resides in Chennai, has disposed of 96,000 cases during his tenure, a feat he says is possible with the planning, organization and classification of cases. As a judge, he used to hear 75 cases on an average in a day. In this interview, he reflects on the nature and law of film, truth as an exercise.
how did you feel seeing you Jai Bheem?
When I saw the film for the first time, I was looking like no one else. Soon, in several scenes depicting the lawyer, I recognized some of his mannerisms and noticed the actions and dialogue I may have used before. These scenes kept reminding me of my life 30 years ago.
In the film, lawyer Chandru firmly believes that the truth will stand with his client and that he will get justice – this only needs to be uncovered. What is your personal experience in this matter?
Under normal circumstances, the victim, or those affected, would, without being educated, tell the exact sequence of events. Only if you start adding your own Spice Will they be confused in their story and make up their own spectacle when confronted.
So, when the woman came to me, I recorded whatever she said about my husband’s disappearance and prepared my case based on that. Later, I read his statement and translated it into Tamil and got it verified by him. Therefore, when he was put on the stand of the witness, he said exactly what was in his petition without contradicting even once from the other side.
The chances of getting justice to the poor and the underprivileged are very high in the court. Nevertheless, we put up a brave face against the adverse weather. When asked how long our poor client would face bitter litigation, we replied, “As long as they get justice, the fight will go on.”
In addition to such bravery, we also do some background work and try to understand our limitations, and at times even compromise, which may not be entirely to our satisfaction. The conviction to fight till the end comes because we do solid research even before going to court and cases are registered only after we are fully satisfied.
People make decisions based on their perception of reality – what they believe to be true. If you assume that not everyone is lying when they say “truth” to different things, then the truth itself becomes multilayered…
I know that truth is always relative. But that doesn’t mean that we always run after approximations of truth because of its relativity. Take the case of Sengani in the film itself. It is true that her husband Rajkannu was found missing. So, our goal was to bring him back alive or dead; word habeas corpus Literally means “to build the body”. We moved the High Court and filed habeas corpus Petition seeking direction to police to produce Rajkannu; He was last seen at the police station, and therefore, the police was responsible for answering the court about his whereabouts.
When the police started creating a false case to cover up their hooliganism, the question of trying to uncover the truth arose. Truth in such circumstances is not an elusive word, but an absolute. after file habeas corpus And recording the statement of the victim woman, I myself had no other material to prove the murder in the lock up by the police. While they had complete infrastructure to propagate new stories, we began our work to trace the whereabouts of the other two persons related to Rajkannu who were found missing.
There my lawyering work stopped and the work of crime investigator started. The second phase of the case began when we were able to trace both of them to distant Kerala and brought them to explain the happenings in the lock-up. It is in the sense that truth was elusive and that our pursuit of the same was dogmatic and necessary in an adversarial jurisdiction.
What should a lawyer beware of?
I always advise young lawyers that in this profession they do not need a six pack body but a six-ounce mind is important.
The lure of quick money, lavish living and lack of legal literacy must be guarded against. You have to be doubly strong to overcome the enormous odds erected by the society and the state against the underprivileged.
In the legal profession, the incubation period required for a young lawyer to earn a substantial income is quite long. So those coming from families of lawyers have a better deal than first generation lawyers.
What did you do in your early years as a lawyer to understand people, society and the law itself?
I never even dreamed of becoming a lawyer. I was a student activist of a leftist movement. After graduation, I decided to do community service and full-time political work. I traveled the length and breadth of Tamil Nadu, lived with different people and understood the plurality of our society and culture.
After that, I decided to do law, mostly to continue with student politics. But during my student days, Emergency (1975-1977) was declared and most of the people were deprived of their constitutional rights. At the same time I decided that the law should be used as a tool to win the rights of the people.
.