Originally posted by: jibi
The matter is 'the trust between a couple' which is so fragile that any third person comes and breaks it.
What is its value if a third person has to come and bring them close.
When Armaan always talked of trusrt between the couple, he told everything to Archana related to this man, why Archana could so easily believe Ajit, whom she should know (by the previous circumstances) is not a well-wisher of her and they openly blamed Archana for breaking Ajit's marriage.
Archana could not believe Manav but she believed Ajit.
Archana could not believe Manav but she will believe Sharvani.
Then in what sense is it a Pavithra Rishta? Utter nonsense.
I agree with you for the most part. But what is she supposed to do with evidence and Manav didn't have any. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm all against this same ol trick of lets pull them apart and then bring them together again. I know this maybe asking for too much, but is there an underlying message i.e. not to trust anyone blindly, even though it is the wrong person here? Manav instead of confronting Ajit should have recorded a conversation between him and his mom, or took a copy of the paper where Ajit signed for bail. I think that is also why Varsha kept quiet, because she knew without evidence no one would believe her. I'm sure right now Arachna deep down knows that her husband isn't like that but couldn't do anything in front of the evidence. Yes its about trust and strong between a couple, but they didnt' even have the time to make their bond strong. Unfortunatley trust takes awhile to build.
