Scribd
Upload
1K views

Brief Summary

The story "In the Court" by Anton Chekhov satirizes the Russian judiciary system through its portrayal of the trial of a peasant named Nikolay Harlamov, who is charged with murdering his wife. The trial proceeds in a dull, indifferent manner, with none of the officials appearing particularly interested in the case or in serving justice. Witnesses are questioned, but key facts remain unclear. Harlamov struggles to understand the proceedings. The story criticizes the incompetence and failure of the Russian courts to adequately handle cases or determine the truth.

Uploaded by

Ashish Ranjan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views

Brief Summary

The story "In the Court" by Anton Chekhov satirizes the Russian judiciary system through its portrayal of the trial of a peasant named Nikolay Harlamov, who is charged with murdering his wife. The trial proceeds in a dull, indifferent manner, with none of the officials appearing particularly interested in the case or in serving justice. Witnesses are questioned, but key facts remain unclear. Harlamov struggles to understand the proceedings. The story criticizes the incompetence and failure of the Russian courts to adequately handle cases or determine the truth.

Uploaded by

Ashish Ranjan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Unit-I

IN The COURT
- Anton Chekhov
Brief Summary
The story “In the Court” published in 1886 related to Chekhov’s experiences from
1884-86, when he worked as a substitute country doctor in Zvevenigorod. Chekhov saw
patients, conducted autopsies, and testified in courts as an expert witness. A lawyer by the
name Serpovsky wrote that Chekhov was keenly interested in the courts proceedings and was
well acquainted with the judicial procedures. Leo Tolstoy considered this story to be one of
the best that Chekhov wrote and called it ‘true pearl.’
They story is a satire on the Russian judiciary. Chekhov, a is true to his style, does not
give a realistic portrayal of the court proceedings. His aim through the story is to criticize the
incompetency of the Russian judiciary. A system that fails in all aspects of serving justice.
His major tool in doing so is satire. “In the court’’ is a very vivid description of the trial of a
peasant named Nikolay Harlamov, charged with the murder of his wife. The author Anton
Chekhov, at the outset, gives a picture of the circuit court at the district town where the
Justices of the peace, the Rural Board, the Liquor Board, the Military Board and many others
sit by turns. The building is a very old one and it bears a dismal appearance without any kind
of comfort.
At precisely two o’ clock the presiding officer announced that the case of Nikolay
Harlamov could next be heard. Harlamov, the prisoner, tall, thick-set peasant of about fifty-
five years was brought in. The presiding officer, the assistant prosecutor, the counsel for the
defence and all the officials of the court wore a monotonous look in their routine work. No
one seemed to have any special interest in his particular case.
At this stage the author reveals the mental make-up of the prisoner who for the first
time got into the clutches of law. He looked with dull-witted respectfulness at the judges’
uniforms and blinked calmly. The charge of murder hung over him and yet here he met with
neither threatening faces nor indignant looks. He did not understand that the men in the court
were accustomed to the dramas and tragedies of life.
In the meantime, after the customary questions to the prisoner, the charge against the
prisoner was read. The charge was that he murdered his wife on the evening of ninth June.
The presiding officer asked him whether he pleaded guilty. When the prisoner denied the
charge, the trial began. The court proceeded with the examination of witnesses. Two peasant
women, five men and the village policeman, who had made the inquiry, were examined. All
of them testified that Harlamov lived well with his wife. On the particular day the body of the
woman was found in the porch with her skull broken. An axe also lay beside her in a pool of
blood. Harlamov had disappeared and came to the police station after two days.
When asked by the president Harlamov told that he was wandering about the fields on
those two days as he was afraid that he might be judged guilty. The district doctor was also
examined. When the defence counsel tried to get an answer to his question from the doctor,
regarding the mental condition of the criminal, he could not get it. Then the material
evidences like the cloth, axe etc., were examined. Harlamov denied that he had an axe and
also he gave different reason for the blood stain in his coat. Harlamov was irritated that he
was not properly heard. The trail came to a close and the prisoner was escorted back and it
was a painful moment. The author ends the description without giving the judgment
pronounced.
This write-up is an attempt to bring out the boredom and indifference peculiar to
criminal trials. The attitude of a poor villager charged with a grave offence is well described.

You might also like