The 2021 movie Jai Bhim, released in November 2021, is based on true events from the 1993 custodial death case in Tamil Nadu and the lawyer who fought the case, K. Chandru (Wikipedia, Jai Bhim (film).) Many people outside India have asked what is true in the movie. Here is the real story, the legal outcome, who the Irular community is, and what the movie changed. This has a legal and policy perspective and is graphic-detail-free.
The movie in brief
Jai Bhim is a 2021 Tamil courtroom drama directed by T.J. Gnanavel and starring Suriya (Wikipedia, Jai Bhim (film)). It is about a woman, Sengeni in the movie, seeking the help of a lawyer after her husband disappears from the police custody. The lawyer later files a habeas corpus petition, a court order mandating the police to produce the person in custody (Wikipedia, Habeas corpus). The movie is titled after the greeting and our article, What is Jai Bhim, explains the title and the controversy the movie’s release created.
The case of Rajakannu
This movie is based on real-life events from the Cuddalore district from 1993 (The Better India, “Real Life ‘Jai Bhim’”). The movie focuses on the figure Rajakannu, who was arrested for theft and detained by the police, where he died due to custodial torture (The Better India, “Real Life ‘Jai Bhim’”). Rajakannu’s wife, Parvathi, did not believe the police when they said Rajakannu escaped. She turned to K. Chandru, a lawyer, for help, where the case was brought before the Madras High Court with a habeas corpus petition (The Better India, “Real Life ‘Jai Bhim’”). From the High Court’s order, the Crime Branch of the Tamil Nadu Police officially registered an FIR on the case (BOOM, “Actual Police Violence Censored”). According to BOOM, the arrest was made on March 20, 1993, and the High Court ordered the arrest on August 1, 1994. The Mooknayak gives the arrest as March 21, so the dates differ by a day.
What the courts decided
After 13 years of legal battles, a court decided this was a custodial death. The police officials involved were sentenced to 14 years of imprisonment (The Better India). In 2006, the Madras High Court convicted all the accused and ordered interim compensation. Parvathi was awarded Rs. 1.35 lakh, Rajakannu’s mother received Rs. 50,000, Rajakannu’s brother received Rs. 25,000, and a relative received Rs. 10,000 (DT Next, “Sensational Rajakannu custodial torture case at Madras HC”). Other reports state an interim judgment was given in 1996 (Socially Keeda), so please see the log.
The case is not entirely over. One of Rajakannu’s relatives recently moved the Madras High Court for enhanced compensation under the SC/ST Act, and the court ordered the state to file a status report (DT Next, December 2025). I could not find the order, and therefore, according to the most recent report, the case is still pending. Learn more about the law in our guide to the Prevention of Atrocities Act.
Justice Chandru
K. Chandru was an advocate in the 1990s, and later became a judge of the Madras High Court (The Better India). In his six and a half years as a judge, he disposed of 96,000 cases (The Better India). He has said the film generally followed the actual events, with some adjustments to suit the film industry (our meaning post notes). BOOM’s coverage states the film’s producer referred to him as the real hero behind the film, and describes how the film failed to show the actual violence perpetrated by the police. In our post on books about caste, we point readers to anti-caste and Dalit literatures, for those interested to read beyond the scope of this post.
The Irular community
In the film, the victims are members of the Irular community. The Irulas are a Dravidian ethnic group in Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka, and in Tamil Nadu, they are in the Scheduled Tribes list and classified as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (The Quint; Vajiram & Ravi “Irula Tribe”). They are Tamil Nadu’s second largest tribal community (Vajiram & Ravi). As per a 2013 report, their population in the state was 189,661 (People’s Archive of Rural India).
The Irular are traditionally snake and rat catchers and are knowledgeable about medicinal plants (The Quint). The Irular Snake Catchers’ Industrial Co-operative Society, set up in 1978, supplies venom for antivenom (Rajagiri Business School). Two members of the co-operative won the Padma Shri in 2023 (Sanctuary Nature Foundation). The Quint refers to the Irular as a historically criminalised community and illustrates the police brutality shown in the film. Our guide to Scheduled Tribes and Adivasis provides information about the legal aspects of the community.
What the film changed
There are four major points of difference.
- The community. Justice Chandru has stated that Rajakannu was from the Kurava community, which has not been recognised as a Scheduled Tribe (Justice Chandru to LiveLaw, as reported by BOOM). There is disagreement in the accounts, and the film has interpreted the community as Irular.
- Names. The Police officer’s real name was not the same as the name used in the film (BOOM’s meaning post) and the name changes were intentional (The Wire, via our earlier post).
- The nature of the violence. BOOM states that the film edited out the true extent of the police violence (BOOM).
- The year. Most accounts place the incident in 1993. One account places the incident in 1995 (Armchair Journal).
Caste and policing in the film
Custodial violence is shown to be connected to caste and tribal status in the film. Our article covering what Article 17 says explains the legal provisions on the abolition of untouchability and our article who are the Dalits? and scheduled castes explain the legal definitions. The film shows how habeas corpus and compensation have been used in cases of custodial death in India.
What the film means outside India
For people in the West, this film is the first time they see a real life example of caste and policing in a legal framework. (Documenting your community’s history, blogging, and other online skills are essential for Self Advocacy. The AEP was founded to teach exactly these skills).
Final thoughts
Jai Bhim is based on the 1993 Custodial death of Rajakannu of Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu and the subsequent Habeas Corpus case fought by K. Chandru (who later became a judge of the High Court). The courts later convicted the police officials and various reports say the sentence was for 14 years and compensation was awarded in 2006. The film changed several facts, e.g. according to Chandru, the name of the community of the victim was changed, and a plea for increased compensation was pending when last reported. It is a dramatization of a true case, with the changes noted above.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Jai Bhim movie a true story?
It is based on a real 1993 custodial death case in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu. The lawyer in the film is based on K. Chandru, who later became a judge. The film changed some details.
Who was Rajakannu?
He was the man who died in police custody in 1993. His wife Parvathi, called Sengeni in the film, fought for justice with the help of the lawyer K. Chandru.
What happened in the real Rajakannu case?
The Madras High Court’s habeas corpus case led to an FIR in 1994. The accused police officials were later convicted and, according to reports, sentenced to 14 years in prison. The court ordered interim compensation in 2006.
Who are the Irular people?
A tribal community in Tamil Nadu, included in the Scheduled Tribes list and classified as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group. They are known for snake catching and knowledge of medicinal plants.
Was the real victim Irular?
In the film, yes. Justice Chandru said that Rajakannu belonged to the Kurava community, which had not been declared a Scheduled Tribe.
Understanding caste is step one. Building digital independence is step two.
Ambedkarite communities around the world are using AI tools, blogging and email marketing to document their experiences, challenge discrimination and build platforms that cannot be silenced.
The Ambedkarite Educational Program teaches exactly these skills: AI tools, website building, email marketing, blogging and Google AI. Lifetime access is ₹297 (~$4 USD). All future courses are included free.
Or join the Movement free to start learning today.
SOURCES
- The Better India, “Real Life ‘Jai Bhim’ Disposed 96,000 Cases in High Court”
- BOOM, “Actual Police Violence Censored: Justice Chandru, Real Hero Of Jai Bhim”
- DT Next, “Sensational Rajakannu custodial torture case at Madras HC for enhanced compensation”
- DT Next, “Custodial torture victims, portrayed in Tamil film Jai Bhim, move Madras HC”
- The Mooknayak, “Jai Bhim: The Saga of Police Brutality, Caste Oppression, and Legal Battle”
- Wikipedia, “Jai Bhim (film)”
- Socially Keeda, “Suriya’s Jai Bheem is Based on This 1993 Cuddalore Incident”
- Armchair Journal, “Jai Bhim: Rajakannu’s lockup death case”
- The Quint, “Why Padma Award for Two Tamil Nadu Snake Catchers Is a Win for Irula Tribe”
- Vajiram & Ravi, “Irula Tribe”
- People’s Archive of Rural India, “Rats are the greatest thieves I’ve ever seen!”
- Rajagiri Business School, “Sustainable business is not an oxymoron”
- Sanctuary Nature Foundation, “Irula Tribe Members Awarded The Padma Shri”
