The hypocrisy in the treatment of Ruhi versus Armaan - Page 17

Originally posted by: WhimsicalMind

Attorneys can argue in favor of criminals doesn't mean the crime wasn't committed

No one is a criminal until they’re proven guilty lol.

Originally posted by: Krinya

I suppose the upcoming track shows abhira fighting for a mother's right, my guess is , it will be a similar case . Get the popcorn ready 🍿

The dumb lawyers who will fight arman and rohits case will Def lose😆 they may/may not take this route but ruhi toh tandav karegi & both the brothers must be reprimanded for their actions .

Let them show a dream where ruhi files a case against them , madhav arrests them , and abhira fights a case against them 🤣

No they won’t do that for the izzat of the poddars 😂

Originally posted by: Noorain13

That’s what I said earlier too lol. Then never went the legal route because they never said the baby was Ruhi’s. They gave it to Abhira saying it’s hers. No adoption, no kidnapping. Lying or hiding the truth is what it is so why are we not calling it that?

They cannot give it to abhira bec it's not it , it's a baby & a mother's rights cannot be waived off unless she's dead or brain dead or insane ..a father alone can't decide to "give" the baby unless he has the sole custody of the baby incase of divorce or death of his spouse isn't it ?

One of the biggest differences is that Armaan actually admits that he is on the wrong path or he knowingly made mistakes in this case deliberately too by agreeing to take the baby. On the other hand Ruhi justifies all her actions. She always cites her trauma as the main reason for her behaviour. Tbh nothing justifies ruining an unborn baby’s sweater, stupidly trying to find gender of your baby knowing the dark history of gender discrimination in India and even now just hating on an innocent baby because it belongs to Abhira. She even wants to call the child asubh which can be similar to manhoos she already called it saman/luggage. These kind of character traits make her really unlikable

Originally posted by: LiveLifeHonest

They can't make decisions and only the legal proxy can make decisions on their behalf. Till the person becomes conscious, doctors makes the medical decisions and legal decisions need to go through court.

And the husband could’ve made the decision on her behalf since she was unconscious to appoint someone for her?

Originally posted by: Noorain13

No one is a criminal until they’re proven guilty lol.

Proven by whom?

There are judges to give verdict in real world because people don't know all the sides, judges go through the case and give verdict

You watch a TV show, are you waiting for a judge to give judgement?

Originally posted by: Krinya

They cannot give it to abhira bec it's not it , it's a baby & a mother's rights cannot be waived off unless she's dead or brain dead or insane ..a father alone can't decide to "give" the baby unless he has the sole custody of the baby incase of divorce or death of his spouse isn't it ?

True, that’s why they’re just making up lies on top of lies and just handed the baby to Abhira just like that when they shouldn’t have lol.

So Ruhi is also not a criminal right?

Originally posted by: Noorain13

No one is a criminal until they’re proven guilty lol.

No the husband can't. Family can have vested interests and so only doctors have to make medical decisions in the best interest of the patient. There was an interesting case in UK, where a man was ill and on life support. The son wanted to withdraw the life support but the doctors did not as they felt that he had a good chance of recovery. When the man recovered and became responsive, it turns out that the son wanted to withdraw the life support and essentially let his father die for property. So no, family members cannot make decisions.

Originally posted by: Noorain13

And the husband could’ve made the decision on her behalf since she was unconscious to appoint someone for her?

Originally posted by: Vanyaa

Exactly yes a good lawyer can use loopholes and even defend a rapist or murderer lol and may even succeed because of insufficient evidence doesn't mean they didn't committed those crimes.

Exactly, since when the argument presented by one party is considered as verdict? Ruhi's lawyer can say her coma was induced by her husband and his brother, they can say they tried to prolong it by giving her expired medicine, here we have hard evidence too but that doesn't mean it is true