NAME: VAIBHAV NITIN PAWAR

SUBJECT: MOOT COURT – I

ROLL NO.: LC2023187

CLASS: LLB III

MEMORIAL I
 BALAJI LAW COLLEGE’S

FIRST INTERNAL MOOT COURT ROUND

BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMAR SHARMA APPELLANT

VERSUS

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENTS PAGE NO.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 4
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 6
STATEMENT OF FACTS 8
ISSUES RAISED 10
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 11
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED 12
PRAYER 21
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And
Sec Section
AIR All India Reporter
Anr. Another
Art. Article
Hon’ble Honourable
i.e. That is
Ors. Others
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Case
u/s Under section
UOI Union of India
v. versus
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Table Of Cases
Sr. no. Cases Foot note no.

Sr.no. Indian books

Sr.no. Legislations referred

Sr.no. Legal database

 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay exercises Appellate

Jurisdiction to hear the matter under. The respondent humbly
submits to jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Court which has been
invoked by the appellant.
 SUMMARY OF FACTS

1. Disha Gupta was a 22-year-old girl from Delhi. Disha wanted to pursue her acting
career therefore she moved to Mumbai. Disha was alone in the new city and had no
friends or financial support from her family, because family opposed her move to
Mumbai. She auditioned for a number of projects but faced rejections in all.
Frustrated by her failures, she tried to commit suicide twice but was unsuccessful in
her attempts.

2. In September 2018, she decided to attend a party graced by a number of Bollywood

stars and industry bigwigs, in the hope of meeting a few directors. There she met
Amar Sharma, one of the most renowned film directors of contemporary times. At the
age of 40, Amar had already directed numerous super hit movies and was known as
the ‘career builder’ for young actresses. Disha and Amar got talking at the bar and
eventually exchanged numbers. They talked and met frequently for a few months post
which Disha confessed her love for Amar and moved into his house. Amar was in a
relationship with Disha after three failed marriages.

3. The Media Agencies posted the latest updates about ‘the newest couple in B town’.
Blind items also began circulating on social media about Disha using Amar to get into
the film industry. The constant media scrutiny and trolling on social media made
Disha vulnerable. Her parents and friends too boycotted her, citing embarrassment
over her actions. All this took a toll on Disha and she pleaded Amar to cast her in his
upcoming dream project soon so that she could showcase her talent. Amar had already
casted the actors and invested huge amount in his dream project but Disha’s constant
pleading along with her negative publicity in the industry adversely affected Amar to
such an extent that he could not focus on his project which gave a huge career set
back to him. The fights between the two increased day by day.

4. Three months later, Amar demanded Disha to leave his house. He claimed that girls
like her come begging to him every day and he can get anyone he wishes. Disha
begged him not to force her to leave the house and promised that she would stop
 nudging him. She told Amar that she was not in a fit state of mind and would like to
seek medical help for the same. Amar immediately dismissed her idea, telling her that
if the Media Agencies found out about her psychiatrist visits, they would label her
crazy and she could effectively bid goodbye to her career then. He advised her to rest
at home and meditate instead. The relationship between the two continued to worsen
and Disha had socially withdrawn, confining herself to the house, whereas Amar was
still socially active and was seen cosying up to young women at parties. In November
2019, a picture of him and a young debutante actress, holidaying at a secluded island
in the Maldives, went viral on social media and got the rumour mills churning about
his separation with Disha. A week later, he released a statement, clarifying that ‘all is
well’ between them and that they were one in their heart and soul.

5. On 5th February 2020, at around 2 am, a call was received at Shivajinagar Police
station stating that a woman with 75% burn injuries was brought to their hospital. The
police rushed to the hospital where the victim was identified as Disha. Post regaining
consciousness after a week, she gave a statement to the Police. According to her, on
that fateful night, Amar returned home from a party, visibly inebriated. Upon
unlocking the door, he saw Disha standing near the stove, holding a can of a blue
coloured liquid. He immediately realized that the liquid was kerosene and he rushed
towards her, fuming with rage. He called her crazy and said that she had ruined all the
fun in his life. He attempted to kill her by pouring kerosene on her exclaiming that if
she was so firm on ending her life, he would make things easier for her. Immediately
after Amar threw kerosene on her, she was soon engulfed in flames as her dress
caught fire from the stove right behind her.

6. She said that over the past year, he denied her psychiatric help and mentally
manipulated her while cheating on her with several other girls. Disha went on to state
that both of them had gotten married at a small temple near Mumbai in October 2019
and Amar had also gifted her a flat in Bandra as her ‘wedding gift’. However, Amar
was adamant that they do not reveal the factum of their marriage to anyone as it
would affect their careers. It was only last month when she found out that Amar’s
divorce proceedings with his previous wife were still pending before the court. Based
on her statement, the Police filed charges under Section 307 and Section 498A of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 against Amar.
7. During the course of the trial at Sessions Court, Mumbai, Amar denied all charges of
cruelty and claimed that he could not be held liable under Section 498A as he was not
the victim’s ‘husband’ as contemplated under the section. He stated that there was no
valid marriage between him and Disha. The fact that his previous divorce proceedings
were sub judice was never hidden and was reported in a number of newspapers as
well. His act of merely putting sindoor and mangalsutra on Disha at the temple, upon
her persistence, could not be construed as ‘marriage’ as it was only done for Disha’s
happiness. With respect to the charge of attempt to murder, Amar claimed that when
he entered the room on that fateful night and saw Disha ending her life yet again, he
was in a state of utter shock. He admitted that in a fit of uncontrollable rage, he did
pour the kerosene on her but never intended to kill her. He was unaware that the stove
behind was lit which actually led to Disha’s clothes accidentally catching fire and
before he could react, she was completely engulfed in flames.

8. The Sessions Court rejected Amar’s plea that the incident was a mere unfortunate
accident and convicted him U/s 307 of IPC for attempting to murder Disha. The court
also held that a person who enters into a relationship in the nature of marriage cannot
be allowed to take the plea that he cannot be held liable U/s 498A of IPC as there was
no valid marriage; thereby convicting him U/s 498A of IPC for subjecting her to
cruelty over the course of their relationship. He was sentenced to 10 years rigorous
imprisonment. Aggrieved by the conviction, Amar appealed against the order of the
Sessions Court before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay.
 ISSUES RAISED

THE RESPONDENT VERY RESPECTFULLY PUTFORTH BEFORE

THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT THE FOLLOWING QUERIES.

ISSUE 1
Whether Amar can be held liable U/s 498 A of IPC?

ISSUE 2
Whether Amar can be held liable U/s 307 of IPC?
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Issue 1: Whether Amar is guilty of subjecting Disha to cruelty?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble High Court that the accused is guilty of
the offence of subjecting his wife to cruelty where any wilful conduct of a nature
to drive the woman to commit suicide or cause danger to life is very much
highlighted in this case. Ergo, the essential element of the section is fulfilled there
by him guilty.

2. Issue 2: Whether Amar is guilty under Section 307 of The Indian Penal Code,
1860 for attempting murder?
It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble High Court that the accused is guilty
under Section 307 of IPC for attempting to murder as the mens rea or the intention
of offender to cause death is present and hurt is caused too. Ergo, the accused is
guilty.
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

Issue 1: Whether Amar is guilty of subjecting Disha to cruelty?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that Amar be charged for the offence of
subjecting Disha to cruelty under section 498 A of The Indian Penal Code.
Contents of Section 498A IPC:
For the commission of an offence under Section 498-A, following necessary ingredients are
required to be satisfied: (a) The woman must be married; (b) She must be subjected to cruelty
or harassment; and
(c) Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by
husband of the woman or by the relative of her husband, U. Suvetha v. State, (2009) 6 sec
757.

Husband - Who is
The expression "husband" covers a person who enters into a marital relationship and under
the colour of such proclaimed or feigned status of husband subjects the woman concerned to
cruelty in the manner provided under Section 498-A, whatever be the legitimacy of the
marriage itself for the limited purpose of Section 498-A. The absence of a definition of
"husband" to specifically include such persons who contract marriages ostensibly and cohabit
with such woman, in the purported exercise of their role and status as
"husband" is no ground to exclude them from the purview of 498-A IPC, Reema Aggarwal v.
Anupam, (2004) 3 sec 199.

Woman - Second wife

A Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has held that even a second wife can file a
complaint under Section 498-A. In this connection, following words of Arijit Pasayat, J.
(talking in terms of Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC and Section 113-B Evidence Act, 1872)
assumes importance:
"... The legislature has taken care of children born from invalid marriages. Section 16 of the
Marriage Act deals with legitimacy of children of void and voidable marriages. Can it be said
that the legislature which was conscious of the social stigma attached to children of void and
voidable marriages closed its eyes to the plight of a woman who unknowingly or unconscious
of the legal consequences entered into the marital relationship? If such restricted meaning is
given, it would not further the legislative intent ........................................................... " (para
18, Reema Aggarwal v. Anupam, (2004) 3 sec 199).
The above said para was quoted with approval in A. Subash Babu v. State of A.P., (2011) 7
sec 616 wherein the Supreme Court held that Section 498-A is attracted even in the case of
allegation of cruelty to second wife.
Also the cruelty can be of various kinds- mental, physical, etc. Cruelty can either be mental
or physical. It is difficult to straitjacket the term cruelty by means of a definition because
cruelty is a relative term.
What constitutes cruelty for one person may not constitute cruelty for another person, G.V.
Siddaramesh v. State of Karnataka, (2010) 3 sec 152.
The concept of cruelty and its effect varies from individual to individual, also depending
upon the social and economic status to which such person belongs, Gananath Pattnaik v. State
of Orissa, (2002) 2 sec 619.
To prove the charges, the council put its arguments as follows:
The section 498 A of IPC states that- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the
husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment
for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. To explain cruelty
the section mention that any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the
woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether
mental or physical) of the woman will be considered as cruelty. Here in the facts, Amar's
behaviour towards Disha completely supports the definition of cruelty. For example cheating
on Disha, not allowing her the basic medical help, etc. which clearly leads to willful conduct
of Amar to drive Disha to commit suicide or cause danger to her life.

Issue 2: Whether Amar is guilty under Section 307 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 for
attempting murder?
The act must be capable of causing death:
It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that Amar has committed an offence u/s 307
BPC and shouldn't be charged with attempt to murder of Disha. In order to prove the crime
u/s 307, analysis of different stages of crime is important. The first stage is the intention to
commit the crime, secondly, the preparation to commit the Crime; and thirdly, an attempt to
commit it. It is to be noted that the essential elements of Sec. 307 are as follows:
• The act must be capable of causing death,
• The existence of the intention of the offender to cause death.

For a conviction under this section it is not necessary that the accused should complete every
stage in the actual offence, except the final action. It is enough if in the attempt he did an act
towards the commission of the offence.
The pre-requisite of an act to be capable of causing death will be dealt with in the first part of
this issue while the intention of causing death will be dealt with in the subsequent part.
It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble court that the act of Amar was capable of causing
death. To justify a conviction under Sec 307 IPC, it is necessary that bodily injury capable of
causing death should have been inflicted. In the case of Jodha v. St. of Rajasthan, the court
ruled that in order for an offence to fall under the ambit of Sec 307, the injury has to be
caused on a vital part of the body.
Presence of Actus Reus: It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble court that the act of Amar
is a crime as it has the essential element of Actus Reus.

Absence of the intention of the offender to cause death:

The essential ingredient to constitute an offence under this section is having the intention or
knowledge. The intention or knowledge can be understood as explained under Section 300 of
The Code15. An act, though sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, it
would not constitute an offence under this Section if necessary intention or knowledge is
lacking.
It is humbly submitted that Amar had the intention or knowledge to commit murder of Disha.
It is evident that such an intention or mens rea was never there, as Amar was only concerned
about his own reputation. In order to prove the presence of intention, the counsel would
request the bench to refer to the statement given by Amar himself where in he clearly admits
that he poured the kerosene himself on Disha when he knew she was holding it to commit
suicide which is an act sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
If the accused intended that the natural consequence of his act should The court in
determining the intention of murder observed, "as far as the part of proving his intention the
nature of the wound, type of weapon used, can be taken into account."
Referring the same to our case, the following observations can be made:
• Nature of the wound: The wound was caused due to the act of Amar. Amar poured
kerosene on Disha, which then went on to catch fire from the burning stove causing 75%
burns to her whole body. This resulted in her being unconscious for 7 days straight, which
itself proves how severe the wound was.

• Type of weapon used: The injury was caused by kerosene, which is a highly inflammable
substance.

Therefore, it proves the point of his intention. And thus, it is most humbly submitted that the
act of Amar is not excusable, and he can be charged under section 307 of IPC.
 PRAYER

Wherefore, in light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, may this
Hon'ble Court be pleased to uphold the very considered judgement rendered by the Session
Court and dismiss the said appeal against the Session court order vide. Disha Gupta v.
Amar Sharma.

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: Mumbai. S/d _________

Date: COUNSEL FOR THE APPEAL