A rare gem Ek ruka hua faisla

In 1986, writer-director Basu Chatterji made a straight-to-TV film based on the classic 12
Angry Men (Sydney Lumet, 1957). Those were the yore years of DD, when anything and
everything that came on the tube became a part of the Indian consciousness.
The film was thereafter telecast often on DD during the election counting sessions, when
Prannoy Roy and Vinod Dua sat together and waited for the paper ballots to be counted.
What I remember clearly, and the only image of the film that has stayed with me, is of a
lip smacking Pankaj Kapur.. a quirk that he added to his character of a bitter man whose
son had abandoned him.
Undoubtedly the best legal thriller to come out of hindi film industry, ERHF is a synergy
of great writing and great acting. The film is set almost entirely in a single room, barring
two inserts of the railway line even those could have been avoided. The drama and
tension is carried forth in dialogues, and as the different details of the case start opening
up, one gets sucked in the universe of the film. What is enticing for a discerning viewer is
that though the end is a foregone conclusion, its how the film reaches the end the
journey is what makes the film a treat to watch.
12 jurors sit in a room to decide the fate of a 19 year old guy, who is accused of stabbing
his father to death. There is enough circumstantial evidence to deduce that the son is
guilty. The father is stabbed with a knife that was reportedly bought by the son that night
itself. Two witnesses had testified against the son an old man who saw the son running
down the stairs apparently right after the murder, and a middle aged woman who saw
the son stabbing his father, from her window directly opposite the fathers room, across
the railway line.
In the first round of voting, the jurors are divided as 11 guilty to 1 non-guilty. There in
begins a session of argument and counter argument, which ends 110 odd minutes later
in the jury deciding unanimously in favor of the son being non-guilty.
No names are taken in the film. The accused is referred to as woh ladka and the victim
as uska baap. The jurors are credited as Juror # 1 Juror # 12. In just the way they
speak and behave, gradually we start to register them as 12 different individuals. The
underlying ethos jurors are distinguished yet anonymous members of the society is
drilled right in. In terms of screen writing this is no easy feat, and Basu da and his writer
Ranjit Kapoor have been able to achieve that perfectly.
The genesis of the conflict rests on the doubt raised by the lone dissenting juror, # 8 (K
K Raina). While his counterparts show undue haste in branding the accused as guilty,
Juror # 8 revisits each evidence point by point, asking his fellow jurors to convince him

and help him make his mind up. The argument put forth by him is His verdict is NotGuilty because he is still not-sure.
Innocent, till proven guilty.
Interestingly, his innocuous suggestion is met with wide hostility from fellow jurors who
think of this as waste of time, when for them it is an open and shut case. It just goes to
show how casually a question of life and death can be treated in our society. The film
thus treads a very thin line successfully, as it cannot be read as an argument against
capital punishment. It just appeals for a judicious and responsible view of the same.
The film takes a scathing view of the fragmented composition of our society. The divide
runs deeper than we imagined. In the drama that unfolds, all the personal biases and
pre-conceived notions held by the individuals surface. The exchanges become vicious
and increasingly personal, and the faade of decency put up by the respected members
of the society soon begins to crumble. At one heated moment, the (Marathi?)
businessman (#6, M K Raina) threatens the Tamilian (#11, Shailendra Goel) of
..sending him back to where he came from. Twenty five years hence, the external
enemy has changed, but the inner enemy still lurks around.
The casting in the film is impeccable, the frame filled with stalwarts from NSD. Subbiraj,
S M Zaheer, Deepak Kejriwal.. all of them are familiar faces of DD and ring in effortless
performances. K K Raina as the rational dissenting architect holds impressively, but it is
M K Raina as the fun loving business man who delivers a solid punch.
Upon viewing again a few days back.. I found the performances of both Pankaj Kapur
and Anu Kapoor bordering on exaggeration.. though their performances in the film have
been hailed as memorable. It is only towards the end when Pankaj Kapur suffers a
breakdown that he walks away with the scene, and the film.
One of the consistent criticisms that the film has faced (labeled as the basic flaw in the
film) is that it shows a jury system of trial when there is none existing in Indian judiciary.
(Jury trials were abolished by the Government of India in 1960 post the case of K. M.
Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra). The jury system of trial is the backbone of the film,
just like 12 Angry Men. Is this then a case of senseless copying from the original?
The film makes pointed references to two hindi films, Mashaal (Dilip Kumar, Dir: Yash
Chopra) and Jaane bhi do yaaron (Naseeruddin Shah, Dir: Kundan Shah), thereby
clearly dating the film as post-1984. It could have easily been set in pre-1959 era for the
sake of authenticity, hardly anything would have changed.
Basu Chatterjee has been a champion of realism and the pioneer of the middle-of-theroad cinema of the 70s, along with Hrishikesh Mukherjee and Gulzar. Classics like

Rajnigandha, Khatta Meetha, Chitchor, Chhoti si Baat (..the list is long!) successfully
established the middle class, BEST-bus-travelling, Sleeves-folded hero (patented by
Amol Palekar ) on the silver screen. These films were rooted in realism and celebrated
the emerging middle class of the metros. The real reason why Basu da took cinematic
liberty and located ERHF in contemporary times can only be answered by him, but an
interesting fact emerges a debate on reviving the jury system of trial is certainly worth
initiating.
Please catch this underrated classic, and it will certainly be worth the 132 minutes spent
on it.
Post Script
Jury trials in India were abolished after the Nanawati case because the jury in the
sessions court was thought to be unduly influenced by the media (notably Rusi
Karanjias Blitz) to give a verdict in favour of K M Nanavati, a Naval Commander who
was being tried for shooting dead Prem Ahuja, his wifes lover.
The weekly Bombay tabloid Blitz, run by Rusi K Karanjia, publicised the story, ran
exclusive cover stories and openly supported Nanavati, portraying him as a wronged
husband and upright officer, betrayed by a close friend.
Prior to making films, Basu Chatterjee was a cartoonist with Blitz. Strange coincidence!

-Vikas Chandra
M um bai