VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT

COMPETITION, 2022

BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT

JAGATPURA, STATE OF KINGSTHAN

S.C. NO. OF 2022

STATE OF KINGSTHAN

(PROSECUTION)

v.

MUNNA SINGH

(DEFENCE)

FOR OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER:

SECTION 363, 376, 377 READ WITH SECTION 302 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
1860 AND SECTION 6 OF POCSO ACT,2012.

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SESSIONS JUDGE

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 ii
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ii

List of Abbreviations iii

Index of Authorities iv

Table of Cases ** iv

Books ** vi

Lexicons ** vii

Websites ** vii

Statutes ** vii

Statement of Jurisdiction viii

Statement of Facts ix

Statement of Charges ** Issue raised x

Summary of Arguments xi

Arguments Advanced

Prayer 16

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 iii
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIR All India Reporter

All Allahabad High Court
Cal Calcutta High Court
Cri LJ / Cr LJ Criminal Law Journal
Cr.P.C. Code of Criminal Procedure
Del Delhi High Court
DW Defence Witness
Ed. Edition
Guj Gujarat High Court
IPC Indian Penal Code
IC Indian Cases
Mad Madras High Court
n. Foot Note no.
Ori Orissa High Court
p. Page No.
P&H Punjab and Haryana High Court
Pat Patna High Court
PW Prosecution Witness
Raj Rajasthan High Court
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SCJ Supreme Court Journal
SCR Supreme Court Reporter
Sec. Section
v. Versus

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 iv
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

TABLE OF CASES:
1. Digamber Vaishnav & Anr. v. State of Chattisgarh (2019)
2. Satpal Singh v. the State of Haryana.
3. Krishna Mahadev Chavan v. State of Maharashtra 
4. A. Jayaram and An r. v. State of AP, AIR 1995 SC 2128

5. Ajab Narain Singh v. Emperor AIR 1939 Pat 575

6. Anvar uddin v Shahkoor, 1996 Cri LJ 1270 (SC)

7. Awdhesh & Ors v. State of MP AIR 1988 SC 1158

8. Badal Sheik v. State 1986 (2) Crimes- 316

9. Bhobhoni Sahu v. King, AIR 1949 PC 257

10. Chakru Sattiah v. State of AP AIR 1960 AP 153

11. Chandra Mohan Tiwari v. State of MP AIR 1992 SC 891

12. Dalbeer Kaur v. State of Punjab AIR 1977 SC 472

13. Dendati Sannibabau v. Varadapureddi AIR 1959 AP 102

14. Emperor v. Jamunia Singh AIR 1945 Pat 150

15. Haipal v. State, AIR 1998 SC 2787

16. Hari Charan Kurmi and Anr v. State Of Bihar, AIR 1964 SC 1184

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 v
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

BOOKS:

1. Field, C.D., Expert Evidence: Medical and Non-Medical, (4th Ed 2007)

2. Gaur, KD Firearms ,Forensic Ballistics, Forensic Chemistry and Criminal

Jurisprudence, (2nd Ed 1989)

3. Gaur, KD, Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, (6th Ed. 2009)

4. Gupte and Dighe, Criminal Manual, (7th Ed. 2007)

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 vi
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
5. Harris, Criminal Law, (22nd Ed. 2000)

6. Hill, McGraw, Criminal Investigation, (4th Ed. 2004)

7. I, III, IV Nelson R. A. Indian Penal Code, 10th Ed. (2008)

8. I, Kathuria, R.P. Supreme Court on Criminal Law, 1950-2002, ( 6th Ed. 2002)

9. II, Mitra, B.B., Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (20th ed. 2006)

10. II, Nandi, Criminal Ready Referencer, ( 2nd Ed. 2007)

11. II, Princep’s Commentary on the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (18th ed. 2005)

12. III, Sarvaria, SK, Indian Penal Code, (10th Ed. 2008)

13. James, Jason, Forensic Medicine: Clinical and Pathological Aspects, (1st Ed. 2003)

14. Kelkar, R.V. Criminal Procedure, (5th Ed. 2011)

15. Lal, Batuk, The Law of Evidence, (18th Ed. 2010)

16. Lyons, Medical Jurisprudence & Toxicology, (11th Ed. 2005)

17. Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, (23rd Ed. 2010)

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 viii
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

18. Parikh, C. K, Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence, Forensic Medicine & Toxicology,

(6th Ed. 2002)

19. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 33rd Ed. (2011)

20. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Law of Evidence, 22nd Ed. (2006)

21. Sarkar, Law of Evidence, (13th Ed,1990)

22. Saxena & Gaur, Arms and Explosives, (10th Ed. 2012)

23. Sharma, B.R., Forensic Science in Criminal Investigation & Trials, (4th Ed. 2003)

24. Tyagi, Surendra Prakash, Criminal Trial (2nd ed. 1996)

25. Varshi, H.P. Criminal Trial and Judgment, (3rd ed. 1981)

LEXICONS:

1. Aiyar, P Ramanatha, The Law Lexicon, (2nd Ed. 2006)

WEBSITES:

1. http://www.findlaw.com

2. http://www.judis.nic.in

3. http://www.manupatra.co.in/AdvancedLegalSearch.aspx

4. http://www.scconline.com

STATUTES:

1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1973)

2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 18 of 1872)

3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)

4. The POCSO Act, 2012 (Act 32 of 2012)

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 viii
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to try the instant matter under Section 177 read with

Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Section 177:

‘177. Ordinary place of inquiry and trial-

Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local

jurisdiction it was committed.’

Read with Section 209:

‘ 209. Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it-

When in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought

before the Magistrate and it appears to the Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively

by the Court of Session, he shall-

(a) commit the case to the Court of Session;

(b) subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the accused to custody

during, and until the conclusion of, the trial;

(c) send to that Court the record of the case and the documents and articles, if any, which

are to be produced in evidence;

(d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the commitment of the case to the Court of Session.’

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 ix
VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022
STATEMENT OF FACTS

STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Simranpreet Kaur(Deceased) @ Guddi is a daughter of Harpal Singh who is a member of

Panchayat and her daughter Guddi studies in 8th Standard and she is 12 Years old.

2. Munna Singh(Accused),a 35 year old man who is also a neighbor of Guddi and he regards

Guddi as her daughter. Everyone in Mansar respects Munna Singh a lot, because he worked a

lot for the development of Mansar.

3. 10 days before the commission of offence Harpal Singh,had a fight with Munna Singh

because Munna Singh saw Guddi with a boy in a compromising situation. Munna Singh got

very angry as he regarded Guddi as her daughter, after which he slapped her very hard and

took her from there.

4. As the matter was related with one of the members of Panchayat, he has to give

resignation from the Member of Panchayat and the composition of the newly elected

panchayat directed him to take care of his daughter or else, next time he with his family has

to leave the village.

5. On 03.11.2019, in the evening Guddi went to the house of her classmate and cousin,
Gurpreet Kaur. At about 05:00 p.m., she left from there to return to her house. She was
accompanied to some distance by Gurpreet. When she crossed pakka water house, Gurpreet
left her on her own.

6. Simranpreet Kaur was last seen with Munna Singh, a 35-year-old neighbour.When
Simranpreet Kaur did not reach her house, search was carried on. Some persons then found
her dead body in the agricultural field belonging to Munna Singh situated in front of his
house. The dead body was found near a tree along with some empty and partially broken
bottles of liquor were also found. In her hand some strands of human hair were also noticed.
It was fully smeared with blood.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 10
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

7. It was also found that there was bleeding from vulva and the legs were also stained with

blood. Body was in state of rigor mortis. There were multiple marks of contusions and

abrasions on the neck. Face also had some abrasions. Abrasions over elbows and knuckle

were present. There were impressions of teeth on the lips. These were all ante mortem in

nature.

8. Although external injuries were found on the neck which were said to be the cause of

death of the deceased, according to the doctor, the death took place because of loss of blood.

9. Lastly, the FIR was lodged by the Harpal Singh @ Father of Simranpreet Kaur on

15.11.2019 against Munna Singh and was charged for Kidnapping, Rape and Murder of his

daughter.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 11
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE I
WHETHER THE CHARGES IMPOSED ON MUNNA SINGH ARE VALID OR
NOT ?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the Charges imposed on Client Munna
Singh are baseless as my client munna is very reputeted person of the and always do work for
the development and benefit of the town . Sir charges imposed on are clients are for
Kidnapping, Rape and Murder under section 363,376,377 are false and have no base .

ISSUE -II

WEATHER THE ORTHODOX THINKING IS THE MAJOR REASON FOR THIS

INCIDENT ?
Orthodox thinking was the major reason behind this crime because many questions raised on
munna singh but no one is aware of the fact that if he was such a sourceful person and also
I want to enlighten the honorable court with some serious facts which was ignored earlier.
Why harpal singh went to police station on seventh of November when he knew that his
daughter was missing from 3rd of November and according to pathology report it indicates that
the murder was happened at the same day at 11pm. So according to the indicating facts its

completely obvious that the person we are searching for is none other that her own father harpal
singh. Let me tell this court the whole fact that was being ignored by everyone when munna
singh dropped guddi she saw his friend and went to meet him immediately and when harpal
singh realized that guddi is still not back he immediately went to look for her where he saw
guddi with that boy and got so angry that he immediately took her with him where he not only
sexually abused her but also murder her just because of this orthodox thinking that what will
people say. He was already having so much of anger against what munna singh did to him
because of which he lost his position from panchayat and also got the warning that if such thing
ever happen again his whole family has to leave the village thatswhy he left the body on the
land which was owned by munna singh to take revenge and also he was knowing that munna
singh was an easy target.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 12
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
ISSUE-I

WHETHER THE CHARGES IMPOSED ON MUNNA SINGH ARE VALID OR

NOT ?

The charges imposed by the petitioner are not liable as all the scenarios that is proving munna
singh is liable for the charges are self created and the reality is far away different from the
picture shown
On 3rd November 2019 when guddi daughter of harpal singh was going back from house of
her cousin guddi was alone from halfway as her cousin left her on her on from there and
when Munna singh saw her going home on her own he told her to come with her because of
his fatherly concern towards guddi which he has proved earlier when he saw her with a boy
in an inappropriate condition which shows if he was having malice intention towards guddi
he would have blackmailed her at the same time but because of his fatherly intention and
concern that every father would have he told guddi’s father as well as the panchayat about
what he saw and this action completely prove that he was having no bad intention towards
guddi, even after being late for her sisters house still he dropped guddi to her home in the
midway she also instead munna to drop her there when she saw her friend. Munna singh
completely denied to drop her there as he was the same guy whom he saw with her earlier in
compromising condition .

Last Scene Theory Under Indain Evidence Act

The foundation of this theory lies on the principle of probability, cause, and connection as no
fact takes place in isolation. Basically, it means that if an event takes place then other events
also take place which are the probable consequences of a major event or is related to it either
retrospectively or prospectively. These inferences or presumptions are drawn logically
according to how a reasonably prudent man will connect the dots in the particular scenario.

This theory derives its relevance from Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act which is called the

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 13
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
1
Sec.7 , Indian Evidence Act

“Doctrine of Inductive Logic” in which it is stated that if any fact related to the occasion, cause,
or effect lead to the circumstance in which that thing occurred or it provided an opportunity for
the occurrence of that thing then those facts will be relevant. And in the last seen theory also the
person who was the last present with the victim would have a reasonable opportunity to commit
the crime.

In the case of Digamber Vaishnav & Anr. v. State of Chattisgarh (2019), it was held that there
should be reasonable proximity between the time of seeing the person and recovery of the body
to point the needle towards the person last seen with the deceased. And in this case, it was
upheld that only the fact that they were last seen together cannot be the sole criteria to convict
the accused. Last seen theory plus all other circumstances negating the innocence of the accused
should be established to convict the accused on the basis of the doctrine of last seen.

In some cases, though there was a huge time gap between the occurrence of the event and the
time when they were last seen together and the prosecution can establish the fact that no other
person could have interfered or intervened as there was an exclusive possession of the accused
to the place where the incident occurred, then based on this also the last seen theory can be
established and presumption can be taken despite a huge time gap as held in the case of Satpal
Singh v. the State of Haryana.

In the case of Krishna Mahadev Chavan v. State of Maharashtra (2021), it was held that even
if the last seen theory was established but when the entirety of circumstances was considered,
they portray suspicions then the judgment cannot be delivered solely on the basis of the last
seen theory. In this case, as a fact of homicidal death was unclear and uncertain, so the accused
was acquitted because guilt was not established beyond a reasonable doubt.

1
Digamber Vaishnav & Anr. v. State of Chattisgarh (2019)
2
Satpal Singh v. the State of Haryana.
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE
 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 14
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 3 Krishna Mahadev Chavan v. State of Maharashtra 

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 15
PRAYER

ISSUE -II

WEATHER THE ORTHODOX THINKING IS THE MAJOR REASON FOR THIS

INCIDENT ?
Orthodox thinking was the major reason behind this crime because many questions raised on
munna singh but no one is aware of the fact that if he was such a sourceful person and also
I want to enlighten the honorable court with some serious facts which was ignored earlier.
Why harpal singh went to police station on seventh of November when he knew that his
daughter was missing from 3rd of November and according to pathology report it indicates that
the murder was happened at the same day at 11pm. So according to the indicating facts its

completely obvious that the person we are searching for is none other that her own father harpal
singh. Let me tell this court the whole fact that was being ignored by everyone when munna
singh dropped guddi she saw his friend and went to meet him immediately and when harpal
singh realized that guddi is still not back he immediately went to look for her where he saw
guddi with that boy and got so angry that he immediately took her with him where he not only
sexually abused her but also murder her just because of this orthodox thinking that what will
people say. He was already having so much of anger against what munna singh did to him
because of which he lost his position from panchayat and also got the warning that if such thing
ever happen again his whole family has to leave the village thatswhy he left the body on the
land which was owned by munna singh to take revenge and also he was knowing that munna
singh was an easy target.

ISSUE - III
WHETHER ANY OFFENCE IS COMMITED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER
SECTION 6 OF POCSO AND SECTION 376 OF IPC ?

The counsel of the defendant most humbly submits to the honorable court that Munna is not
liable for the offences u/s 376 of IPC and sec 6 of pocso act .
I would like to bring back the court's attention to the basics of criminal law that is an

1
Sec.376, Indian Penal Code
2
Sec.6 , Pocso Act

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 16
PRAYER

established mens rea and actus rea for the crime makes the person liable.
There is no direct evidence or eye witness to the fact that my client is accused of,

Additionally he is very clear of his intentions with the girl, he had a parental duty towards her,
she was the daughter of her colleague, daughter of a member of panchayat. He has no intention
or motive to cause any harm to the deceased. There is no reasonable belief, why would he try to
cause any damage, the facts are clear as water, he has already attempted to rescue her from
falling into a bad influence.

I assure the court about the character of my client as he is a very reputed man in the society,
also member of panchayat and is very respected member of the village. He has always been a
helping hand to the family.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AS WEAK EVIDENCE

Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something happened but it is often
useful as a guide for further investigation.Tthe presented evidences and witnesses are not
enough to impose such charges just because Guddi was last seen with my client,

Narendra Singh vs State Of U.P. on 30 May, 2019

Prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that in a case based

on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be
drawn must be cogently and firmly established and that those circumstances must be conclusive
in nature unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused. Moreover all the circumstances
taken cumulatively should form a complete chain and there should be no gap left in the chain
of evidence. Further the proved circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of
the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence.

In a case, based on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be drawn only when all

4
Narendra Singh vs State Of U.P, 2019

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 17
PRAYER
the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of
the accused. In Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra (2006) 10 SCC 681, it was held
as under:-

The normal principle in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances

from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established;

that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt
of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that
there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was
committed by the accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other
than that of the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with their innocence."

LACK OF EVIDENCE

High Court Sets Aside Conviction Of Rape-Murder Accused Due To Lack Of Evidence in
case of Mohan Jadhav was convicted and sentenced to a life term by a local court in 2015
for an offence under sections 302 (murder) and 376 (rape) of the IPC.

5
The State Of Maharashtra Vs. Vijay Mohan Jadhav @Nanu And Ors

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE

 VGU RANKA NATIONAL TRIAL ADVOCACY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 18
PRAYER
PRAYER

Wherefore, in light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, may this

Hon‘ble Court be pleased to:

1. Acquit Mr.Munna Singh of the offence of committing Kidnapping ,Unnatural offence

, Rape with murder under section 363, 377,376/ 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Kindly Acquit also Mr. Munna Singh of the offence of committing under section 6 of

POCSO, 2012

AND/OR

Pass any other order it may deem fit, in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good
Conscience.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted

Place: S/d

Date: 1 April, 2022 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE