Team Code:

MOOT COURT COMEPTITION, 2022

Before

Hon’ble Apex Court of India

WRIT PETITION NUMBER 11/ 2020

FILED UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:

Manu Bhai Sharma [PETITIONER]

versus

Government of India [RESPONDENT]

MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT

 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE | I
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT TABLE OF CONTENTS
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

PAGE | II
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS

PAGE | III
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The present memorial on behalf of the respondent sets forth the facts, contentions and
arguments in the present case.

PAGE | IV
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

STATEMENT OF FACTS

 Lucknow is known for its Ganga Jamuni Tehjib and culture.

 On 7' July 2021, during a 'Ganjing Carnival' which is a state sponsored programme to
promote cultural values and affinity amongst city populace, there was a group clash over
priority of playing songs amongst students of two prestigious colleges of Lucknow which
was sorted out immediately by the Police and administration.

 On 15' July which was a Sunday a group of students were playing cricket on theGround
of one of the prestigious colleges i.e., KML College. The students of other college i.e.,
MLP College came there and started playing also. In the meanwhile, there was fighting
between college students and same was reported to nearby Police Station.

 On 26' July 2021 which was again a Sunday a student of 17 years of age studying in 10th
class at MLP College was in Lucknow Zoo along with her friends.

 Suddenly a car bearing the number UP 32 ZZ 3231 came and two boys wearing a mask
tried to drag her in the car.

 She was found lying in the heart of city near Hazratganj profusely bleeding and
primafacie it looked like that she has been sexually assaulted.

 Police reported the crime and started investigations. Police got some clue with the help of
CCTV footage and found that most of the times the Car was roaming between the two
aforementioned colleges.

 The Autopsy done by a panel of Three doctors on the victim shown injuries on her.

 The registration number of the car after investigation it came to light belonged to KML
College which was used for transportation of college students.

 The Chief Minister seeing the high profile of the case referred the matter to CBI who in
investigation filed a charge sheet against these four students for committing rape and
criminal conspiracy.

PAGE | V
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ISSUES RAISED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

 In the trial court the accused took plea of doli incapex and adduced High School
certificate for their support. Prosecution submitted Birth Certificate made by Nagar
Nigam which said that Aamir and Suhail were major.

 The trial court nevertheless convicted them with 7 years rigorous imprisonment and 2
years rigorous imprisonment for criminal conspiracy.

PAGE | VI
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ISSUES RAISED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE A - The Trial Court erred in appreciation of evidence and by convicting caused
miscarriage of Justice.

ISSUE B - What was the age of perpetrators?

ISSUE C - Can accused be convicted solely on broken circumstantial evidences.

PAGE | VII
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ISSUES RAISED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

PAGE | VIII
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 2 - WHAT WAS THE AGE OF PERPETRATORS?

A document shall be taken to form part of the records of a business or public authority if there is
produced to the court a certificate to that effect signed by an officer of the business or authority to
which the records belong. For this purpose— (a) a document purporting to be a certificate signed by
an officer of a business or public authority shall be deemed to have been duly given by such an
officer and signed by him; and (b) a certificate shall be treated as signed by a person if it purports to
bear a facsimile of his signature.1

The Indian law requires every birth to be registered by the Registrar appointed by the State
Government.2

The birth certificate is the first right of the child and it is the first step towards establishing its
identity and the age of the child.

In other cases, the age is to be determined by adducing evidence. In order of preference, age is to be
determined by reference to the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a
panchayat. Age determination of a child on the basis of a school certificate or the birth certificate
from another state takes long time in procuration and certification of those documents and it may
not be possible to do both age determination and initial assessment within the time frame
provided.3

1
ARJUN PANDITRAO KHOTKAR …Appellant Versus KAILASH KUSHANRAO GORANTYAL AND ORS. …
Respondents
2
The Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1967, section 7.
3
58 JILI (2016) 83

The Juvenile Justice Act 2015 Critical Understanding

Ved Kumari*
PAGE | 1
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

In case, the Committee or the Board has reasonable grounds for doubt regarding whether the
person brought before it is a child or not, the Committee or the Board, as the case may be,
shall undertake the process of age determination, by seeking evidence by obtaining—

(ii) the birth certificate given by a corporation or a municipal authority or a panchayat;

the Bench stated that in Sanjeev Kumar's case, there was clear and unimpeachable evidence
of date of birth which had been recorded in the records of the school which the respondent
therein had attended till class 4, however, in the instant case in the absence of there being any
evidence to negate the date of birth recorded in matriculation certificate same, the criminal
revision deserved to be dismissed.4

To reach this conclusion, the Court relied upon the birth certificate of the student,
educational certificates of mother, passport etc. which revealed that the mother’s
name was recorded as “Fakiha Khan” in all these documents and it was nothing but an
inadvertent error on the part of parents to have used the nickname of the mother while filling
her school forms. The impugned judgment relied upon the respondent’s Birth Certificate.5

4
Sanjeev Kumar Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh,
(2019) 12 SCC 377
5
JIGYA YADAV (MINOR) (THROUGH GUARDIAN/FATHER HARI SINGH) ...APPELLANT Versus
C.B.S.E. (CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION) & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)

PAGE | 2
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

ISSUE 3 - CAN ACCUSED BE CONVICTED SOLELY ON BROKEN CIRCUMSTANTIAL

EVIDENCES.

The word 'circumstantial' itself implies that what is evident directly from the circumstances in any
particular case even though the evidence itself is not direct. We all know very well the time-tested
and well-established basic principle of law that a witness may lie but not the circumstances.
It is therefore not for nothing that many a times circumstantial evidence also becomes the only
source for convicting a person
 
Chief Justice M Monir in the book 'Textbook On The Law Of Evidence' on page 13 very elegantly
differentiates between direct and circumstantial evidence and points out that: Circumstantial
evidence does not prove the point in question directly, but establishes it only by inference.
 
Advocate Batuk Lal in his book 'The Law Of Evidence' in page 30 points out that, Circumstantial
evidence is that which relates to a series of other facts than the fact in issue : but by experience have
been found so associated with the fact in issue in relation of cause and effect that it leads to a
satisfactory conclusion. It is also pointed out that circumstantial evidence is not to be confused with
hearsay or secondary evidence.

GS Pande who is Professor of Law ( Retd. ) in Lucknow University very rightly and lucidly explains
what circumstantial evidence is all about in his enlightening book 'Law Of Evidence' on page 46. He
writes that, Circumstantial evidence is that which relates to various circumstances which are
associated with the real point in issue in such a way as to help the court in coming to a conclusion
about the existence or non-existence of the facts in issue.

PAGE | 3
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

It is often said that a witness may tell a lie but circumstances cannot. It is an exaggeration of its
importance though it contains a grain of truth in so far as circumstances have no volition and they
cannot have interest and motive which inspire a human being to give false evidence. 
 
Before convicting any person on circumstantial evidence alone, all the Courts including the Supreme
Court are bound to take into account all the chain of circumstances which should directly point to
the culpability of the accused and should not leave any straw of doubt
The evidentiary value of circumstantial evidence acquires immense significance when there is no
direct evidence in any given particular case. It means a fact from which some other fact is inferred
and deals with a fact on which an inference is to be founded.

In Krishna Ghosh v State of West Bengal, AIR 2009 SC 2819, the accused persons were
convicted for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC.
The High Court dismissed the appeal. The accused appealed to Apex Court on ground that
the case rested on circumstantial evidence alone. The facts were that the deceased woman had
died of injuries caused by the physical assault on her whose dead body was found in her
matrimonial home.
Circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and
totally inconsistent with his innocence. In short, the circumstances from which an inference is
drawn must have to be shown to the closely linked with the principal fact sought to be
inferred from the circumstances and this was held so in Nargundkar v State of MP AIR 1952
SC 343.

BW Jone's in his 'The Law Of Evidence' in 5th edition in Volume 1 on page 7 rightly points out
that, Circumstantial evidence refers to facts indirectly related to the fact in issue, these
circumstances having been found by experience so associated with that fact that in the relation of
cause and effect they lead to a satisfactory conclusion.
Underhill in his book 'Criminal Evidence' in 5th edition Volume 1 on page 16 elaborates on
circumstantial evidence stating that:
It consists of proof of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact
may be inferred according to reason and common experience. It is evidence which tends to establish
the fact to be proved through inference based on human experience that facts exists when a certain
circumstances or set of circumstances is present.

In Eradu v State AIR 1956 SC 316, it was held by Supreme Court that circumstantial evidence
should point inevitably to the conclusion that it was the accused and the accused only who were the
perpetrators of the offence and such evidence should be incompatible with the innocence of the
accused.
 
There should not be any gap left in the chain of evidence. It must be so complete as not to
leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused
and must show that in all human probability, the act must have been done by the accused as
was rightly held by the Supreme Court in Kusum Ankama Rao v State of A.P., AIR 2008 SC
2819.

3. It is true that no chain should be left out but yet it is not necessary that every chain should
be clear. Some of them may be inferred from proved facts.

PAGE | 4
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

n a catena of decisions, the Supreme Court has relied upon circumstantial evidence in
convicting the accused. In NS Nagendra v State of Karnataka 2014 (1) Supreme 352, it was
held by the Supreme Court that when chain of circumstances is complete conviction cannot
be interfered with.

PAGE | 5
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

PAGE | 6
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
 MOOT COURT COMEPETITION,2022

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced, reasons given and
authorities cited, it is most humbly prayed before this Hon’ble Court, that it may be pleased
to adjudge and declare that:

a. The Trial Court erred in appreciation of evidence and by convicting caused miscarriage of
Justice.

b. What was the age of perpetrators?

c. Can accused be convicted solely on broken circumstantial evidences.

And for this act of kindness the respondents as are duty bound shall ever pray.

Date – 20/03/2022 (S/d)

Place - Hon’ble Apex Court of India Counsel for the Respondent

PAGE | 7
MEMORIAL for RESPONDENT PRAYER FOR RELIEF