The Case Files

Case Files

In six decades at the Bar he appeared in a great many cases, in trial courts across Tamil Nadu and all the way to the Supreme Court. Some of the most prominent are told below in the order they came, from the record and with his part in each.

What happened

On the afternoon of 12 January 1967, the actor M. R. Radha called on M. G. Ramachandran at his home at St. Thomas' Mount, accompanied by the producer Vasu. The two had played hero and villain in some of the biggest Tamil films of the decade, and by then their rivalry had left the screen. A talk about film business became an argument. As he rose to leave, Radha drew a revolver from his dhoti, fired at MGR from close range, and then turned the weapon on himself.

The bullet struck MGR near the left ear and lodged in his neck. Both men survived surgery at the General Hospital in Madras while the crowds outside turned violent. The shooting came weeks before the 1967 Assembly elections, in which MGR was the DMK's star campaigner and its candidate at St. Thomas' Mount.

M. G. Ramachandran signs his nomination papers for the 1967 election from his hospital bed.
M. R. Radha and M. G. Ramachandran, in happier days.

The evidence

The Crime Branch CID found that MGR and Radha owned identical .420 Webley and Scott revolvers, bought on the same day from the same Madras firm in the early 1950s. MGR had kept his licence current. Radha's had lapsed and was never renewed. At the committal proceedings before the Sub-Magistrate at Saidapet that May, the prosecution examined seven witnesses, and the bullets removed from both men were marked as exhibits.

At trial the defence put forward another account: that there had been a struggle for a gun, and that it was Radha who had been fired upon. The case turned on the forensic record. The State Forensic Science Laboratory and the prosecution's firearms expert traced the bullets, including those taken from Radha himself, to Radha's own revolver.

His part

Twelve years into his practice, N. Natarajan was on the team that defended Radha. In a case that turned on firearms evidence, the sternest test for the defence lay in the witness box of the expert, and it was there that he made his mark. Senior Advocate N. R. Elango, one of his juniors, has described his cross examination of the ballistic expert as a textbook lesson in examining a forensic and scientific witness.

How it ended

  • 12 JanThe shooting at St. Thomas' Mount. Radha is arrested the same day.
  • MayCommittal proceedings before the Sub-Magistrate, Saidapet.
  • 4 NovSessions Judge P. Lakshmanan convicts Radha of attempted murder and sentences him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment, with concurrent terms for the firearms offences and for attempted suicide. The judge rejected the defence account, found Radha's own wounds self inflicted, and said only his age, 57, stood against a heavier sentence.

Sources

What happened

At the end of October 1977, as Indira Gandhi toured Tamil Nadu, black flag demonstrations by the DMK at Madurai turned violent. In the prosecutions that followed, M. Karunanidhi, the former Chief Minister, and a number of his colleagues were charged with a range of offences, among them conspiracy to murder her. It was a charged moment in the State's politics, and the cases were followed closely across the country.

M. Karunanidhi, whom Natarajan represented in this and many other matters.

His part

Natarajan was on the team for the defence. He represented Karunanidhi in a great many cases over the years, and this was among the gravest of them, the charge of conspiracy to murder a serving Prime Minister. The prosecution did not hold, and Karunanidhi was released unconditionally on 8 December 1977.

Sources

  • R. Shunmugasundaram, as reported in The Times of India, 12 November 2021
  • Ilankai Tamil Sangam, MGR Remembered, Part 77

The matter

On 12 March 1993, twelve bombs exploded across Bombay within a few hours, killing 257 people and injuring hundreds more. The investigation passed to the CBI, and the accused were tried before a Designated Court under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act. It became one of the largest criminal trials India has conducted: 129 accused stood trial.

His part

The CBI engaged Natarajan as a Special Public Prosecutor, and that was itself unusual. He had spent years appearing against the agency, and it rarely briefs a lawyer who has done so. He opposed every bail application the accused brought. Yet when charges came to be framed, he told the court that against some of those arrayed as accused there was no material on which to charge them.

He always believed a prosecutor must first be fair.

N. R. Elango, Senior Advocate

How it ended

  • 1993The bombings on 12 March. The CBI takes over the investigation.
  • 2006At the close of a trial conducted by Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam, the Designated Court convicts 100 of the 129 accused, with sentences pronounced through 2007.
  • 2013The Supreme Court, on 21 March, upholds the death sentence of Yakub Memon and commutes the death sentences of ten others to life imprisonment.

Sources

The matter

Diaries and papers seized in CBI raids on the Jain brothers recorded large payments that appeared to have reached politicians and officials across the political spectrum. Vineet Narain v. Union of India, the public interest petition that followed, pressed the agencies to pursue everyone named without fear or favour. It grew into one of the defining cases on the independence of the country's investigating agencies.

The petition pressed the investigation all the way to the Supreme Court.

His part

Natarajan appeared as Senior Advocate for the respondents. Justice Sunder Mohan, then a junior in his chamber and now a judge of the High Court of Madras, assisted him in the case.

How it ended

In its judgment of 18 December 1997, the Supreme Court laid down a set of directions to insulate the Central Bureau of Investigation from extraneous influence and placed it under the statutory supervision of the Central Vigilance Commission, a landmark in the law on the independence of the investigating agencies.

Sources

  • Vineet Narain v. Union of India, (1998) 1 SCC 226, Supreme Court of India, 18 December 1997
  • High Court of Madras, profile of Justice Sunder Mohan

The matter

On the night of 21 May 1991, a suicide bomber killed Rajiv Gandhi, the former Prime Minister, at Sriperumbudur. Eighteen others died with him and 43 were seriously injured. A Designated Court under TADA convicted all twenty six accused and sentenced every one of them to death. The sentences came to the Supreme Court as Death Reference No. 1 of 1998, heard together with the appeals of the convicts.

His part

Natarajan led the defence, appearing as senior counsel for every appellant but one, in a hearing that ran for over three months. He contended that confessions recorded under TADA could not be used to convict the appellants under the Penal Code once the TADA charges failed, relying on the Court's decision in Bilal Ahmed Kaloo. N. R. Elango has said that he convinced the Court this was a murder, not an act of terrorism.

On sentence, he pleaded that Nalini's death sentence should not be confirmed: she was young, the mother of a daughter born in prison, had come to regret her part, and had been drawn in by others rather than playing a major role.

The judgment

The Court set aside every conviction under TADA, holding that the charges did not make out a terrorist act.

  • 19accused cleared of the murder conspiracy altogether.
  • 3death sentences commuted to life imprisonment: Robert Payas, Jayakumar and Ravichandran.
  • 4death sentences confirmed: Santhan, Murugan and Arivu unanimously, and Nalini by a majority.

On Nalini the bench divided. Justice Thomas would have spared her life. Justices Wadhwa and Quadri confirmed the sentence, though Justice Quadri wrote that whether to sentence a woman to death had troubled him for a considerable time. Her death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment in 2000, and she was released in 2022.

Sources

The matter

In 1986 India signed a contract worth about Rs 1,437 crore with the Swedish manufacturer AB Bofors for 155 mm howitzers. Allegations that commissions had been paid to secure it became one of the defining political controversies of the late 1980s, and the CBI's investigation ran for well over a decade.

His part

Natarajan appeared as counsel for the CBI. On 9 October 2000 the agency filed a supplementary charge sheet against the three Hinduja brothers, Srichand, Gopichand and Prakash, alleging that they had received 81 million Swedish kronor from AB Bofors.

How it ended

  • 2004Delhi High Court, 4 February. Justice J. D. Kapoor finds insufficient evidence that Rajiv Gandhi, the former Defence Secretary S. K. Bhatnagar or other public servants received the payments, and quashes the charges against them.
  • 2005Delhi High Court, 31 May. Justice R. S. Sodhi quashes the proceedings against the Hinduja brothers and AB Bofors, criticising an investigation that had run for fourteen years at a cost put at nearly Rs 250 crore.
  • 2018Supreme Court, 2 November. The CBI's appeal is not entertained, having been filed 4,522 days late.
  • 2026Supreme Court, 6 August. Justices J. B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran dismiss the last remaining appeal, closing the case after four decades.

The matter

When the wife and family of the comedian Nagesh, one of the best loved actors of Tamil cinema, were arrested on charges of murder arising from a bitter family dispute, they turned to Natarajan for their defence.

The comedian Nagesh, whose family Natarajan defended.

His part

He appeared for the family in their defence, as he so often did when a criminal charge met a well known name. It was work of exactly the kind that made his reputation, quiet, thorough, and on the side of a fair trial whoever the accused.

Sources

  • R. Shunmugasundaram, as reported in The Times of India, 12 November 2021
  • dbsjeyaraj.com, on the life of Nagesh