Feisal Alkazi’s play The Kambatta Case is all about recreating the events of the 1959 Nanavati murder case. The director takes Shrabasti Mallik through the many twists and turns of the trial
It was the year 1959 and India was in a state of confusion. The first prime minister of independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru, had already taken his position and was trying to bring the country out of its trance of still being under the British rule. The new democracy was formed and India was about to turn a new leaf when Bombay, now Mumbai, shook with the murder trial of Prem Bhagwandas Ahuja. The accused Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati, a commander of the Indian Navy, was taken into custody because he was charged for the murder of Ahuja, his wife’s lover.
According to records, Nanavati found out that his wife was having an affair with his friend Ahuja and went to the docks, took his revolver and loaded three bullets into it. He then went to Ahuja’s place, to kill himself after confirming from Ahuja that he will marry his wife and take care of his children. But when Ahuja replied in negative, three shots were fired and Ahuja was dead.
The case was solved subsequently but it affected four-year-old Feisal Alkazi so much that after 56 years of the case’s closing, he adapted the entire episode as a play. Cities become synonymous with certain incidents that happen there, said Alkazi, director of The Kambatta Case, a play based on events and court trials related to the murder case which was called KM Nanavati vs State of Maharashtra. “It was very big back then and people in Mumbai talk about the case, even today. Just like the Aarushi Talwar murder case immediately brings up Noida in mind, similarly Nanavati’s case is associated with Bombay,” Alkazi pointed out.
A few years ago, he came across a book Mumbai Fables, which documented the events that shaped the present day metropolis and the case was one of them. There were many aspects related to the case that intrigued the director and he made sure that all of them came to light in the play.
Nanavati’s case was the last jury trial in India. Jury trial is a western concept, explained Alkazi. “The British introduced the jury trial, where there were 12 Indian members in the jury, presided over by a British judge. The jury was allowed to make a decision regarding the case but the final authority lay in the hands of the judge. Nanavati’s case was the last jury trial in India,” he said. The jury did not accuse Nanavati guilty of Ahuja’s murder so the presiding judge overruled the decision and passed it over to the Supreme Court, where he was charged guilty and was sent to serve three years prison time.
The characters of Alkazi’s play had different names. While Nanavati was renamed Rumi Kambatta, his British wife Sylvia Nanavati became Rose. Alkazi gave each of them a back story and also tried to point out the fact that lady Jefferies, Rose’s mother did not leave the country with the empire.
The play also depicted beautifully how media (in the context to the case) influenced public judgment. With every step of the event happening on stage, journalists from a tabloid appeared on stage and tried to figure out how to turn every event into a headline. And not just that, given the seriousness of the case, the director also incorporated the catchphrase of a popular news show title, to bring in some comic relief. “Media is all about making news and sometimes in the process much of the judgment is coloured. It is like an institution in a democracy. People are so influenced by it, even without them knowing it. The judgment to the Nirbhaya case came comparatively fast because it was all over the media and so much was said and written about it. It is one important issue that I wanted to project, that the justice system talks of black and white but life is not about that,” said the director.
The pivotal character of the play, apart from the Kambatta’s, was Karl Khandalawala, the lawyer of the estranged couple. He tried, by all means possible, to try and save Kambatta from being charged for murder. He even went to the point to call for an insanity plea for Kambatta, something that Nanavati’s lawyer did. Alkazi explained, “During the court proceedings, Nanavati claimed that he could not remember killing him even when ballistics confirmed that the gunshot wound that Ahuja took to his chest were from Nanavati’s revolver. An insanity plea was a perfect explanation for his case.”
Even after so many years of the case, the characters and events are remembered from time to time. After serving three years in prison Nanavati along with his wife and three children, migrated to Canada and settled in Toronto, where he breathed his last in 2003.
photos Sanjeev Kumar