Four deductions

In court. The merchant's case sounds strong: 'These men know every detail of my missing camel, yet they insist they have never seen it. How else could they know so much about it?'

The King does what the merchant never did. He asks each man how he knew. That one question is the whole scene.

Ram Datt: lame in one leg. In the tracks, only three feet left clear prints. The fourth was faint, which showed a limp: the camel could not put its weight evenly on all its feet.

Shiv Datt: blind in the right eye. The camel had nibbled the foliage (leaves) only on the left side of the road. The leaves on the right were untouched, as if it had not seen them.

Har Datt: a short tail. He saw small drops of blood along the track, probably from mosquito bites. A camel with a long tail would have fended off (kept away) these pests easily, by flicking them away.

Dev Datt: a pain in the stomach. The prints of the forefeet (front feet) were deep and clear, but those of the sound (healthy) hind (back) foot were faint. The camel was drawing up its back legs, walking carefully because of pain in its belly.

What all four share. Each starts with something anyone could see (a track, a leaf, a drop of blood) and reasons to something nobody could see. That is deduction. The King calls their reasoning flawless (perfect).

The verdict. 'Your accusations are baseless and misguided. These are men of wisdom, not thieves… be mindful of whom you accuse in the future.' The merchant is told to be careful; the four are not punished.

Then the King makes the four his advisers, praising 'the ability to see beyond the obvious': noticing details others miss.

The court bursts into applause. The four feel proud and humbled at once. They came looking for work; they leave as the King's advisers.