Posted:
When one accuses someone of a crime, they do require solid evidence to prove them guilty.There are two situations which are to be considered here ...
The accused is guilty or
The accused is innocent.
Any justice system requires evidence to come to a conclusion whether the person is guilty or innocent...There are many cases where the innocents are punished for the crime they never committed without sufficient evidence they were judged as guilty until they were proven innocent.
And in the other cases the people who did actually commit crimes may be Scott free just because there wasn't enough evidence against them to prove them guilty.This is the perfect example of shambu's murder case due to lack of evidence viplav could not prove tripurari guilty of murder.
Accusation alone is not proof.When someone usually accuses you of something which you are not doing it is because it they are the one doing it. Raja keeps accusing dhani being not loyal to her husband and all but he is the one who puts his words into actions.
Here dhani is immediately considered to be a shameless woman by kanak and everybody while in raja's case he is pure and pious ...It is unfortunate that people accuse someone for something they have never committed.And the ones who actually do commit escape.
Viplav knew without evidence he cannot prove raja guilty of his crime.Be it being an impostor or a swindler or cheater. He did have evidence against raja cheating on shalu which was caught in his phone.Without evidence tripathis will never believe raja to be an impostor or a cheater...now with enough proof he can punish the avasthis for their deeds so that no other family gets destroyed due to their greediness.
Do share your views.😊
Seher Hone Ko Hai
Tum Se Tum Tak
