At first glance, Section 375 might seem like just another legal thriller, but it’s far from that. It’s a dive into India’s legal system, sexual consent, and the blurry line between morality and law. You know how most courtroom dramas hover in that grey area, just enough to keep you hooked, but not enough to really shake you? This film goes further. It isn’t interested in easy answers or moral comfort, it pulls you into a space where truth, justice, and the law don’t always align. It is not here to comfort you, it’s here to challenge you, and question everything you thought you knew about right and wrong. Section 375 doesn’t just tell a story; it starts a conversation we all need to have. What’s your take on where law and morality collide?
Shivangi Sharma, the Chief Entertainment Officer at Excitel, shares three bold takeaways capturing the heart of what makes the film essential viewing in today’s socio-legal climate.
1. “We’re Not In The Business Of Justice. We’re In The Business Of Law”
This brutal line, delivered by Tarun Saluja (Akshaye Khanna), sets the ideological tone of the film. As a seasoned defense lawyer, Saluja is calm, clinical, and unapologetically loyal to the system, even when that system seems morally compromised. To him, justice is abstract; law is rooted in facts and evidence. The story begins with the arrest of film director Rohan Khurana, accused of raping his assistant, Anjali Dangle. While public opinion sees it as an open-and-shut case, the courtroom reveals how fragile and manipulable facts can be. Through Saluja’s relentless defense, we witness a system driven not by moral truth but by the burden of proof.
2. Consent Is Not Black And White
The film’s most unsettling tension lies in its portrayal of consent within an exploitative relationship. Anjali Dangle, played with restrained pain by Meera Chopra, recounts her trauma in harrowing detail. But in court, her words and actions are dissected with surgical precision, casting doubt not on the act but on the meaning of consent itself. Flashbacks reveal moments that were voluntary yet deeply uncomfortable, blurring the line between choice and coercion. With Khurana as her employer, the power imbalance is clear. Saluja’s cross-examination, though legally sound, feels morally invasive. The film leaves you with one haunting question: what does consent look like when silence is survival?
3. The Truth Doesn’t Always Win, And That Should Terrify Us
Perhaps the most unsettling conclusion Section 375 delivers is that the legal system can follow every rule and still leave behind a bitter aftertaste. In the climax, in the eyes of the law, Tarun loses. However, as the truth is unveiled his protégé Hiral Gandhi (Richa Chadha) is visibly shaken. She embodies idealism, someone who believed the law was a path to moral justice. Her heartbreak isn’t just about the truth losing; it’s about realising the system doesn’t always protect the vulnerable. In a quiet final confrontation, the film delivers its harshest reality: sometimes, the truth gets buried beneath the weight of procedure. Section 375 doesn’t preach; it provokes and leaves behind no answers, but a lingering ethical unease.
Don't Miss:How Indian Laws Can Protect You From Stalking
( This article is authored by Shivangi Sharma, the Chief Entertainment Officer at Excitel)
Image Credits: Freepik
If you liked this story, then please share it. To read more such stories, stay connected to HerZindagi.
Take charge of your wellness journey—download the HerZindagi app for daily updates on fitness, beauty, and a healthy lifestyle!
Comments
All Comments (0)
Join the conversation