I am often asked why crime fascinates me. To that my reply is as simple as this: anything out of the ordinary fascinates me and I am not alone in this. More than 70 per cent of daily news hinges on murders, scams and conspiracies. And that’s because even the reader’s and the television viewer’s mind is fascinated by crime.

Incidentally, there has been a gross misinterpretation of my interest in the Neeraj Grover murder case. The incident of the murder by itself does not arouse my curiosity but the psychological aspects of its aftermath most certainly do.
What could have compelled such a horrifying murder? What kind of mental state would have led to a killing at 7.30 am in an apartment building in the heart of Mumbai’s suburbs? How could a young man and woman, who seem so perfectly normal, turn into monsters in a minute? My study of the circumstances around the murder and my research into the incident, aided by my own imagination, have created and arrived upon what I would like to believe is the truth. My conclusions may not have anything to do with the actual truth. But for a film-maker there cannot be something like the truth, and nothing but the truth. His or her take is a cinematic liberty which gives an outlet for the freedom of interpretation and expression.
Back in 1998, it was felt that my film Satya was a very authentic portrayal of the underworld. Even some cops have told me that to make a film so real to its last detail, I must have had some kind of connections with the underworld. Ironically, I had never ever met a gangster in my life. My attempt was to merely make the audience connect to the emotions of each and every one of the characters — so they believe that this is how those people may behave in situations which are so extreme in nature. The “may” factor here is of primary importance.
It is because of my need to ask and my desire to know why and how a certain incident happened that I became a film-maker. Large sections of the media and protesters went ballistic, wanting to know why Maria Susairaj was let off. My question to them is: how do they know the actual facts? Without knowing anything about the case and what exactly her involvement is in the case, if they want her to be penalised for the rest of her life, in my opinion that amounts to nothing but witch-hunting.
Whether she is guilty or a killer or maybe even a serial killer, I don’t know. Whatever my interpretation of the case is nothing but an indulgence in a guessing game. I carry no brief for Maria Susairaj — she is not my sister or friend — that I should defend her. My concern is merely in my hypothetical compulsions about what can make a horrifying crime like this possible. That thought itself calls for a deeper and a more thorough knowledge and study of Maria. That’s what I was harping on.
For all the hoopla around the media claims on how they got justice in the Jessica Lal murder case, they should not forget that in the case of the reopening of that case, there were scores of witnesses where the murder took place and the suspect’s accomplices were arrested. Vis-à-vis the Neeraj Grover murder case, there were no witnesses and it occurred in a flat in between three people. Of them one died, and the other two became the accused. The investigative team and the judiciary which will only have to go by evidence can reach the truth as common people will never ever really completely believe. That’s why the lies and the truth behind this crime fascinate me.