By: Rewa Sharma
This article is written by a third year law student of O.P Jindal Global University. She can be
reached at 22jgls-rssharma@jgu.edu.in
Image Source: DNA India
Introduction
The movie “Court” is a Marathi movie directed by Chaitanya Tamhane. It revolves around a
folk artist in his sixties Narayan Kamble, who was ‘arrested for the abetment of suicide’ of
Vasudev Pawar, a manual scavenger. Kamble is accused of allegedly singing a song near
Pawar’s house about how every manual scavenger should take their life by inhaling the toxic
gases of the sewer, which instigated Vasudev to commit suicide. This film presents a nuanced
and authentic portrayal of the Indian legal system, particularly highlighting scenarios involving
marginalized individuals who lack the resources to mount a robust defense. The central theme of the movie addresses the systemic flaws and inequities inherent within the Indian justice
system.
Casteism
The movie "Court" begins with the arrest of Narayan Kamble, a performer, at an event, and
follows Vinay Arora, a criminal lawyer who champions the rights of marginalized individuals,
as he takes up Kamble's case. Kamble is charged with the non-bailable offense of abetting
suicide under the Indian penal code and is held in police custody throughout the legal
proceedings. However, Vinay faces numerous challenges in arguing Kamble's case, one of
which is casteism. Kamble, being a Dalit, is viewed as a threat to the upper-caste establishment
by the police, who display bias towards him, with little interest in actually investigating the
case. Moreover, in the movie, the investigating officer refers to Kamble as an "extremist" for
singing about society and depicting its realities. The police and the plaintiff's advocate attempt
to intimidate and humiliate Kamble, wielding their power. The plaintiff's advocate even brings
up Kamble's past to suggest that he is not a law-abiding citizen, despite having no relevance to
the case, as Vinay points out. The judge, despite Kamble's obvious framing, dismisses the
defense's argument that the case is founded on casteism, stating that caste is irrelevant to the
trial.
This relation between casteism and the Indian legal system is also well explained in Marc
Galanter’s “Law and Caste in Modern India” (Galanter, 1963). In this book, Marc Galanter
describes how casts play a significant role in the Indian legal system, and how lower-class
individuals often face discrimination and injustice in legal proceedings. He justifies this
hypothesis by explaining how even though the law can be a powerful tool for social change, its
impact is limited by the persistence of caste-based discrimination. This is so because cast
affects the selection of judges, administration, and ultimately various laws as the lawmakers
themselves are unaware and ignorant of hardships faced by marginal groups. The movie
"Court" highlights the inspector’s presumption of Kamble's guilt before the trial, a bias that
would not have been present had the accused been a member of the upper class.
Wrongful Conviction
The second theme highlighted in the movie was “wrongful conviction”. The problem of unjust
arrests of innocent people has persisted in India for a long time, with cases such as 'Hussainara
Khatoon v. Home Secretary', 'State of Bihar, Zulfikar Nasir v. State of Uttar Pradesh &
Ors'., and 'Mohammad Nisaruddin Case'((n.d.). Manupatra articles) serving as examples of
unjust convictions resulting from racial discrimination, fabrication of evidence, and
injustice towards minority populations. Such wrongful convictions have been linked to
systemic biases and discrimination against minority communities in the country.
The movie "Court" centres around this issue, highlighting how marginalized groups are often denied a fair trial and end up being imprisoned for crimes they did not commit. The case of Narayan Kamble is a classic example of such an injustice. The Indian criminal justice system is typically slow, under-resourced, and vulnerable to corruption and political pressure. This leads to flawed investigations, coerced confessions, and the use of unreliable evidence in convicting
individuals, as seen in the movie. Additionally, there is a prevalent belief that law enforcement
agencies in India, including the police, target members of minority communities based on their
religion or caste. Wrongful convictions are not merely legal or technical errors, but are instead
deeply rooted in social, cultural, and political factors( Naughton, 2014) .
The movie has showed how, in India not everyone is given access to justice, only the privileged
are benefitted from it. Despite significant progress in recent years many barriers still exist that
prevent individuals, particularly those from marginalised communities. First barrier is the sheer size and complexity of India’s legal system. The country's legal system is a mix of common law, civil law, and customary law, and there are numerous courts and tribunals at the national and state levels. This can make it difficult for individuals to navigate the system and understand their legal rights. Second major barrier would be poverty. Many individuals simply cannot afford the cost of legal services, and legal aid programs are often underfunded and understaffed. This can leave vulnerable populations, such as women, children, and members of lower castes, without adequate legal representation or support. In the movie "Court," Narayan Kamble was unable to pay his bail fee due to his financial situation, which demonstrates how marginalization can affect access to justice.
Pre-Trial Detention
Another dilemma discussed in the movie court is the wide spread use of pre-trail detention in
India. In the movie “Court” Tamhane highlights the injustices of the pre-trial detention system, which allows for individuals to be detained for extended periods without trial or bail. Kamble
in the movie is detained In jail for months, even though there is little evidence to support the charges against him. His lawyer Tanmay Arora is also shown criticising pre-trail arrest, highlighting the prejudices and biases of the police and prosecutors, who target marginalized
communities and individuals without evidence or justification.
K.D Gaur in “Poor Victim of Uses and Abuses of Criminal Law and Process in India ”( Naughton,1993) talks about the abuse of pre-trial detention in India, in which she explains how pre-trial detention is often used as a form of punishment, even before a person has been found guilty of a crime. This is particularly true for poor victims who are often the most vulnerable to abuses of the criminal justice system. Gaur has identified the lack of due process protections for individuals in pre-trial detention. This can include delays in court proceedings, lack of access to legal representation, and a lack of transparency and accountability in the criminal justice system, which were all identified in the movie “court”.
Bureaucratic System
The bureaucratic system is another issue mentioned in the film. The movie demonstrates how
bureaucratic processes in the legal system may be slow and onerous and how they can be
abused by those in positions of authority to prevent the accused from receiving justice. The
process of providing bail to the accused is one illustration of this. Despite the absence of
evidence against him, Kamble is repeatedly denied bail in the film. The bureaucratic procedures
involved in the bail process are portrayed as frustrating and Kafkaesque, with the singer's
lawyer having to navigate a labyrinthine system of forms and approvals.
Similarly, the court proceedings in the film are often beset by bureaucratic hurdles and delays. The legal system is shown as being overburdened and under-resourced, with judges and court staff struggling to keep up with the volume of cases. This results in delays and postponements, which prolong Kamble’s detention and deny him justice. The movie also emphasises the part that bureaucracy plays in maintaining societal injustices. The accused singer is a member of a marginalised community, and the largely upper-class and Brahminical justice system treats his case with disrespect. The legal system's bureaucracy is portrayed as a weapon of their subjugation, with the police, prosecutors, and judges all painted as cruel and prejudiced.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is important to highlight that, although Kamble's case is a fictional
scenario, it mirrors the real-life struggles faced by thousands of defenseless individuals in India.
Members of various minority groups are frequently denied justice, resulting in the unjust
incarceration of thousands who may not have rightfully earned such a fate. This situation arises
from the disparity in economic and financial resources available for legal representation. Such
inequities not only undermine the fundamental objective of justice , but also reflect poorly
on the effectiveness of national governance.
One potential solution to address these issues is to enhance the integration of technology and
digital platforms within the justice system. By facilitating easier filing of complaints, tracking
of cases, and receipt of updates, these advancements could alleviate the dependence on physical
presence and paperwork, which often pose barriers for marginalized individuals. Additionally,
improving legal aid programs and ensuring robust representation for marginalized groups is
essential for providing access to competent legal counsel and thereby ensuring fair trials.
Furthermore, promoting awareness of legal rights through community programs and
campaigns can empower individuals, encouraging active participation in the judicial system
and fostering a more equitable legal environment.
In conclusion, the story of Kamble and the movie "Court" highlights the need for reforms in
the Indian legal system. It is imperative to create a more inclusive and accessible justice system,
which caters to the needs of all citizens, irrespective of their religion or identity. By doing so,
we can ensure that justice is delivered fairly and equitably, and that the rule of law prevails in
the country.
Bibliography
1-Book- Galanter, Marc. “Law and Caste in Modern India.” Asian Survey, vol. 3, no. 11, 1963, pp.
544–59. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3023430. Accessed 16 Apr. 2023.
2-website- M. (n.d.). Articles – Manupatra. Articles – Manupatra.
3- Article - Naughton, Michael. “CRIMINOLOGIZING WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS.” The
British Journal of Criminology, vol. 54, no. 6, 2014, pp. 1148–66. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/43819246. Accessed 17 Apr. 2023.
4- Journal - Gaur, K. D. “POOR VICTIM OF USES AND ABUSES OF CRIMINAL LAW AND
PROCESS IN INDIA.” Journal of the Indian Law Institute, vol. 35, no. 4, 1993, pp.
183–232. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/43953211. Accessed 17 Apr. 2023.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author (s). They do not reflect the views or opinions of Diplomania or its members.
Comments