Anatomy Of A Coincidence | Part 03 | Under Lens

In High Court, Nanavati was found guilty and convicted for a life term. However, different media sections and people from community kept the issue alive and demanded pardon. Government wanted to balance the rage of both the communities and in an extraordinary string of events where a Sindhi convict of respected background was pardoned along with Nanavati. 

In 1973, Gulzar released a movie with Vinod Khanna in lead role – Achanak. Loosely based on Nanavati trials, Achanak was perhaps the second film on this subject plot. Sunil Dutt and Leela Naidu starrer Yeh Raaste Hai Pyaar Ke was the first. But was Yeh Raaste Hai Pyaar Ke based on Nanavati Trial?

In an interview, Leela Naidu claimed that the story and screenplay for the movie was written before the Nanavati case came to fore. Another co-incidence? Well, though the film didn’t work, it is considered to be one of Sunil Dutt’s better performances by the people of that era. Perhaps, relevance played some role here.

Note:

1. Anatomy Of A Murder attained reputation of one of the finest courtroom dramas ever made. It inspired many lawyers like 12 Angry Men.

2. Nanavati case served as a benchmark and reference in many cases. Nanavati left India and settled abroad with family.

3. Jury system was abolished else we would have seen Sunny Deol screaming against twelve of them in Damini.

4. Achanak became a successful film and established Vinod Khanna as a strong actor.  

Anatomy Of A Coincidence | Part 02 | Under Lens

KM Nanavati comes to know about his wife Sylvia’s affair with his friend Prem. They were cheating while he was away on long assignments. Nanavati realized that their relation damaged beyond repair. Only natural progression was a separation. Despite of all this he wanted his wife to be happy and a security for children. He decided to take the matter in his hand.

Prem, however, was interested in a fling than a relationship. He didn’t had any ambition to marry Sylvia. He stated that categorically to Sylvia. Having casual relationships was not an alien concept for him. But when Nanavati came to know about it the equations changed. Nanavati asked him if he wants to honor the relationship or not. Prem responded with a ‘No’. Nanavati was not ready to accept that as an option. He killed him.

Much like Lt. Manion, Nanavati surrendered with a cool demeanor which was in his favor when the trial began. He was not deemed to be a danger. His uniform and Parsi background also helped him. Sylvia also stood by him. He regretted her affair with Prem and knew that Prem never inteded to marry her. It was a proud defense personnel against a lecherous backstabber. Jury was prejudiced and Nanavati was found not guilty by Jury. Case was referred to High Court.

That was the last time Jury decided fate in a court trial in India. Case was identified as an example where Jury was misled by external factors and were not able to hold tenets of justice. The issue became political. Sindhi community backed Prem as Prem was a Sindhi and they believed that killing was unnecessary. Parsi community backed Nanavati as he did it to keep his honor intact. This trial became a milestone in Indian judiciary and questioned constitution on many points. It also affected the political dynamics and cinema of yesteryears.

Anatomy Of A Coincidence | Part 01 | Under Lens

April 27^th, 1959 -  Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati, a reputed commander in Indian Navy kills his friend Prem Ahuja.

July 01^st, 1959 - A movie based on a 1952 bestseller is released. Lieutenant Frederick Manion kills restaurateur Barney Quill.

Two totally unrelated events had their own share of co-incidences. In the movie, Anatomy Of A Murder which was based on novel by the same name, a small town attorney Paul Biegler played by James Stewart takes on two attorneys prosecuting his client. His client pleads non-guilty on account of temporal insanity. Barney Quill takes advantage of his wife and he murders him in rage. Movie allows the plot to remain in grey area as viewer is made to believe that it is possible that Manion killed Quill in an irresistible impulse, the other scenario where subtle witness doctoring led to fooling of Jury is equally possible.

Decorated officer Lt. Manion who kills a person with dubious record and character and has molested his wife is deemed to be guided by an irresistible impulse to kill and Jury finds him non-guilty. The USP of the movie lies in the trial and the way motive of the murder is used as a trigger to temporal insanity. With few evidences and high emotional voltage Biegler is able to set up the case. He slowly invalidates the solid evidences provided by the prosecution and establishes his case on a weak but emotional foundation. The case is less about establishing a fact but more about establishing it in front of Jury.

Approximately two months back, a similar incident happened in the other part of the globe – in Bombay, India. -  Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati, a commander in Indian Navy kills his friend Prem Ahuja under similar circumstances but for different reasons.