| Director | Ajay Bahl |
|---|---|
| Genre | drama film |
| Country | India |
| Box office | ₹12.3 crore |
Notable film director Rohan Khurana is arrested and convicted by a sessions court after assistant costume designer Anjali Dangle accuses him of rape. In the High Court, senior criminal barrister Tarun Saluja works to punch holes in the accuser's claims. Hiral Gandhi, a fervent lawyer fighting her first major case and a former trainee of Saluja, serves as the prosecutor representing the victim. Tarun operates by the principle that "law is a fact, justice is abstract," believing that a lawyer should remain emotionally detached from a case. In a flashback to a seminar attended by Hiral, Tarun surmises that the pursuit of justice is merely a career opportunity for the defense, prosecution, and judges alike, summarizing his worldview with the line, "We're in the business of law, not of justice." This stands completely contrary to Hiral's passionate desire to deliver absolute justice, an ideological difference that had previously forced her to quit Tarun's law firm.
During his cross-examinations, Tarun exposes tampered evidence, fabrications, and hidden facts among the key witnesses. He proposes that Anjali and Rohan engaged in a consensual relationship that initially began under the pressure of retaining her job but evolved into an emotional involvement for her. When Anjali realized that Rohan was only interested in a physical relationship and had no intention of marrying her, a major argument ensued. Rohan belittled her, threatened her career, and threw her out of his secondary apartment where they conducted the affair. Tarun notes that after a couple of days, Anjali apologized to Rohan, they rekindled their relationship, and later that same day, she reported the encounter to the police as a rape.
Insisting the case is simply an affair gone sour, Tarun points out that the law does not classify consensual physical relations as rape. Hiral counters that even if a couple shared prior consensual intimacy, any subsequent sexual encounter without explicit consent constitutes rape. The case directly disputes the legal provisions of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines the strict conditions of the offense.
The two presiding judges find themselves in a difficult position; the circumstantial evidence strongly indicates that Anjali filed the case to avenge her personal humiliation, yet there is a powerful public perception that rich, influential citizens are exploiting the underprivileged. Deliberating in their chambers, the judges realize that ruling in favor of Rohan would damage their professional credentials. Observing furious anti-Rohan protests escalating outside the courthouse, the bench ultimately delivers a verdict heavily influenced by public sentiment.
While the bench acknowledges the legal merit of Tarun's defense, popular opinion forces them to strictly adhere to the letter of the law. The judges uphold the sessions court conviction, ruling that in the absence of definitive physical evidence regarding consent or force for this specific incident, the statement of the victim remains paramount evidence. Following the verdict, Rohan's wife, Kainaz, abandons him, refusing to support him any further. While Tarun promises a devastated Rohan that they will immediately appeal the conviction in the Supreme Court of India, Rohan is taken into custody. In the aftermath, a triumphant Anjali privately confesses to Hiral that Tarun's courtroom timeline was entirely accurate and that she fabricated the rape charge purely for revenge. Stunned by the revelation, Hiral later attends a dinner hosted by Tarun's family, where Tarun reminds her once more that they are in the business of law, not of justice—a principle she now fully understands.