Section 375

FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR

The Fundamental Attribution Error basically says that we judge others based on their personality and fundamental character, but judge ourselves based on our situation and circumstances.

If we make some mistake, we blame it on the situation. But if the same mistake is made by others, we somehow know for a fact that it is because of their inability, their personality and their carelessness.

Let’s look at the story of the movie Section 375. If you have watched it already, you’d be able to relate better, but for others, I’ve tried to lay the plot briefly below to give you enough context.

The movie is a very well written courtroom drama with Tarun Saluja (Akshaye Khanna) as the defence lawyer, Hiral Gandhi (Richa Chadda) as the prosecutor arguing rape charges filed by the victim Anjali Dangle (Meera Chopra) against Rohan Khurana (Rahul Bhatt).

Rohan, a successful Bollywood director and Anjali, a budding costume designer hoping to build a successful career in the industry, get along well in showbiz. Anjali bags a couple of big projects working under Rohan and is optimistic of a bright future.

Their relationship, however, turns into an affair and when things do not turn out well between the two is when the plot thickens. And it is unfortunate and absolutely miserable to see people in influential position misuse their power to personal whims and fancies.

Long story short, one thing leads to another and Rohan (who is already married to Kainaaz Khurana) ends the affair suddenly and withdraws Anjali from all the ongoing projects. From working on a few big projects and making a name for herself in the industry to losing everything instantly, reality hits Anjali hard. She realises this, apologises to Rohan and goes back to him to avoid any further lost opportunities. Taking advantage of his position, Rohan calls her to his residence and yet again, tries to exploit her of the situation, assaults her and forces her into having sex. Anjali couldn’t stand it any further, it was the end of the line for her.

So, as it happens, Anjali files a case against Rohan for rape and sexual assault. She presses charges and gains the media and public support overnight!

The rest of the case is discussed in a highly engaging courtroom drama. One thing I particularly like about this movie is how fine the dialogues are written and how the director, Ajay Bahl, explores a very controversial and uncomfortable territory.

With this backdrop and before discussing the movie any further, let’s look at a few things very objectively.

• Is Rohan a nice guy? Absolutely not.

• Did Rohan have a history of misbehaviour? Yes.

• Did Anjali have an affair with Rohan, knowing he is married? Yes.

• Did Anjali have consensual sex with Rohan before the rape incident? Yes.

• Does having a bad past make the accused guilty of current charges? No.

• Do we have strong proof of rape? Not rape, but marks of physical abuse and sex. And a confession by Anjali.

• Did Anjali have a blemishless history to take her word as gospel? No.

So, as you can see – the case stands on a knife’s edge. And in cases like these, the victim’s confession against the accused is sufficient to pronounce him guilty. And the court will decide that based on the facts, the evidence and the victim’s statement, which will be the final judgement and that is fine! And that’s exactly how a judgement is passed – after a thorough and unbiased examination of the facts and evidence, not from hearsay and definitely not because some section of the public thinks so.

So, what has this story got to do with Fundamental Attribution Error, you wonder?

The reason I gave this entire backdrop is to show the relevance and importance of context and facts before a judgement is passed about anything or anyone. And the ‘Fundamental Attribution Error’ I would like to refer to in this story is that made by the media and the public, people like you and me. People like us.

In this case, the defence lawyer, Tarun, was seen by the media and the public as the villain for defending the accused. In fact, even Hiral Gandhi, the prosecutor (who herself was Tarun’s student) was surprised at Tarun’s lack of awareness. She wondered how Tarun was not able to see things that clearly portrayed Rohan guilty and was surprised at how hard he was trying to defend Rohan of rape charges!

The media and public outrage are understandable – they are disgusted with such pathetic behaviour of men across industries, strata, and geographies. But are they right in calling the accused guilty already? Because people knew Rohan’s past and his character, they judged him based on his past and his character than the facts. And they believed it and could have bet their life on it. They believed they were right, no matter what the actual truth was. They knew that Rohan was a sick person, and hence must be the culprit.

But, is that the truth? Did their judgement stand on a strong ground? Were they prone to the fundamental attribution error? I guess so.

As it happens in the end, Anjali confesses to Hiral Gandhi that it was not rape. Anjali couldn’t digest the fact that she got those projects, not because of her talent and skills but because Rohan did her a favour by spending time with him. She felt like a whore, and was hurt. She wanted to take revenge. Cleverly, and with vengeance, she made a case for herself.