RIFLE RANGE BOY: The State has its responsibilities too?

Janaki V vs State of Kerala (J.S.K, Malayalam, 2024)

Written & Directed: Pravin Narayanan

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt23458804/

I heard about this film even before its release. Thanks to the free publicity generated by its legal entanglements, even those least interested in watching the film found themselves eagerly awaiting its launch. Sometimes, one wondered whether these legal disputes were self-inflicted. With so many films being produced in India nowadays, without such spicy elements, some movies might simply go unnoticed. There are only so many hours in a day!

The main issue the complainants had with the film was its title. It was initially called 'Janaki vs State of Kerala'. In the story, the protagonist, Janaki, is raped. Therefore, naming a rape victim after the revered goddess Sita is disgraceful, according to the plaintiff. Janaki is another name for Sita, Lord Rama's consort and an avatar of Goddess Lakshmi. To make matters worse, the officer who helps her navigate an uncooperative police system and formalities is Muslim. The legal expert who carefully examines the facts to prove her innocence is Christian.

The courts considered their plea and chose to insert a 'V' after Janaki, the character's father's name, Vidhyadharan. That move soothed everyone. So simple.

Every Hindu has a name that may be linked to the 330 million gods in Hinduism. How can a person bestow a name without invoking any of the deities?

An IT professional visits her hometown to attend a religious festival. She is sexually assaulted by an unknown individual and cannot remember the incident because she was possibly drugged. When her father tries to report it to the police, he gets caught in a stampede at the station during a separate protest related to another case involving a Bishop. The evidence is inconsistent, suggesting a possible unseen influence from above. Janaki became pregnant, likely as a result of the interaction.

The film highlights a very relevant point. Law and order services are established in the country to protect its citizens. Citizens, through the democratic process, periodically elect their preferred government to maintain peace and order. When the State fails to provide the promised adequate protection to its people, is the Law responsible for addressing or fixing the consequences of their failure? Just as the State endeavours to defend the voiceless and marginalised when they are wronged.

Towards the latter part of the film, when her case finally reaches court, Janaki is already seven months pregnant. The perpetrator is eventually identified. Through her solicitor, she demands that the State of Kerala absolve her of all mental trauma and public humiliation of being an unwed mother, all due to their incompetence. She requests that her fetus be surgically removed and placed under the care of the State from the neonatal stage until the child reaches 18. The courts agreed, which I thought was quite far-fetched. But that is poetic justice for the masses.

P.S. In my twisted mind, I wonder. Just because the rapist turned out to be a lowly loafer who is a nobody, did Janaki demand the termination of the pregnancy? If he had been the son of a millionaire or someone with deep pockets, would she have decided to keep the baby? Just thinking.