PT 3, MOOT PROBLEMS, AY 2023-24

5 Years BLS/LLB, Semester IX

3 Years LLB, Semester VI

Every student has to write the memorial and make oral presentation on the moot court
problem assigned, for 30 marks. Each student must study the case assigned and prepare
the memorial accordingly. Make sure you do not copy-paste any content from any online
source. Each student must work on this assignment individually and submit the memorial
on or before 30th August 2023.

Case No. TYLLB- Roll No. 5th BLS- Roll No. On behalf of-
1 1 to 3 1 to 3 Appellant/Petitioner
1 4 to 6 4 to 6 Respondent
2 7 to 10 7 to 10 Appellant/Petitioner
2 11 to 13 11 to 13 Respondent
3 14 to 16 14 to 16 Appellant/Petitioner
3 17 to 19 17 to 19 Respondent
4 20 to 22 20 to 22 Appellant/Petitioner
4 23 to 25 23 to 25 Respondent
5 26 to 28 26 to 28 Appellant/Petitioner
5 29 to 31 29 to 31 Respondent
6 32 to 34 32 to 34 Appellant/Petitioner
6 35 to 37 35 to 37 Respondent
7 38 to 40 38 to 40 Appellant/Petitioner
7 41 to 43 41 to 43 Respondent
8 44 to 46 44 to 46 Appellant/Petitioner
8 47 & 48 47 & 48 Respondent
9 49 & 50 49 & 50 Appellant/Petitioner
9 51 & 52 51 & 52 Respondent
10 53 & 54 53 & 54 Appellant/Petitioner
10 55 To last roll no. 55 Respondent

STRUCTURE OF MEMORIAL

a. Cover Page
b. Table of Contents
c. Index of Authorities
d. Statement of Jurisdiction
e. Statement of Facts
f. Issues raised
g. Summary of Arguments
h. Arguments Advanced
i. Prayer
k. Exhibits (Judgements relied on)
Moot Problem No. 1

The Democratic Republic of Amphissa is situated in Asian Subcontinent. Amphissa is a

quasi-federal country comprised of 35 states with strong central Government. The Laws of
Amphissa are in Pari-materia with the Laws of India. Pallaka is among one of the developed
states of Amphissa. Michael and Jenny are citizen of Amphissa. They are resident of
Flemingo, a small town of Pallaka.
On dated 25th feb.2008, Michael, aged 29, S/O- Late John, R/O- 54/3-New Ext. Apartment,
Flemingo, and Jenny, Aged 24 yrs, D/O- Defrado, R/O- Greater Ango Colony, Flemingo,
were married according to their religious rituals. Their marital life was going smoothly. On
some occasions they used to have few verbal quarrels with each other but they reconciled
soon after the verbal fight. Two years after the marriage Jenny gave birth to a baby girl on 4 th
September 2010. The girl was named as Jennifer. After few months of the birth of Jennifer,
Jenny observed certain changes in the behaviour of Michael. Michael started behaving in a
rude way and he usually becomes violent on every petty issue without any reason. Initially
Jenny did not took the matter in a serious way but when the violent character of Michael
continued Jenny took her husband Michael to the doctor Alfered (DW1), who was a
psychiatrist. The doctor advised Michael to have control over anger and to take certain
medicines. The doctor diagnosed him to be suffering from first stage of Bipolar Mood
Disorder (Bipolar disorder, also known as manic-depressive illness, is a brain disorder that
causes unusual shifts in mood, energy, activity levels, and the ability to carry out day-to-day
tasks. There are four basic types of bipolar disorder; all of them involve clear changes in
mood, energy, and activity levels).
In spite of the medical treatment the violent behaviour of Michael continued to exist. On
slight issues Michael becomes violent and he also started to fight with Jenny and he also use
to beat him without any reason. On dated 5th December 2010 at 11am, loud noise of fighting,
crying and shouting was coming from the house of Michael. On hearing the cry Daniel(PW3)
who was neighbour of Michael went in the house of Michael and found Jenny lying
unconscious on the floor pooled in blood with various injuries on her body. At that time
Daniel saw Michael hiding a 7 inch Iron Axe in the garden. Thereafter Daniel called the
police and Jenny was taken to government hospital whereby she was treated by Dr. Andrew
(PW2). Michael was arrested by police on the same day and was kept in police custody. On
6th December, 2010 Jenny regained her consciousness and her statement was recorded by
Jaison (PW1) SHO of Flemingo Police Station. In her statement she told to the police that on
5th December at 10 am Michael came home and started fighting with her in a violent way and
when she resisted Michael attacked him with axe kept in the garden. On 8 th December Jenny
died because of the injury in her lower abdomen which proved fatal. Jennifer the daughter of
Michael was sent to Government Child Care Centre.
On the basis of the statement of Daniel and the dying declaration of Jenny FIR was lodged
against Michael vide. 733/2010 in Flemingo police station. Michael was prosecuted under
Section 302 of IPC for the murder of Jenny. During interrogation Michael stated that he was
unconscious at the time when Jenny was attacked. He told to police that when he regained his
consciousness he found Jenny lying on the floor and axe in his hand. He told to the police
that he did not know from where the axe came and he also stated that he did not know how
Jenny died.
Final Report was submitted on 3rd Feb.2011 in which Michael was charged for murder of
Jenny under Section 302 of IPC. The case (State of Pallaka vs. Michael) was tried by the
Session Court vide Session Trial No-57/2011.
The prosecution examined the material witnesses in the court as under:-
Prosecution Witness 1 (PW1)- Jaison, SHO, Flemingo Police Station and Investigating
Officer of the case deposed before the Court that the deceased Jenny in her dying declaration
blamed Accused Michael for the attack over her. PW1 also deposed before the Court that the
axe used for attack was recovered from the garden of Michael on which there was finger print
of Michael as per forensic report.
Prosecution Witness 2 (PW)3- Dr. Andrew who treated the deceased deposed before the
Court that the cause of death was due attack of the axe and the injury on abdomen proved to
be fatal. He also deposed that Jenny was in a mentally fit condition at the time of making
dying declaration.
Prosecution Witness 3 (PW3)- Daniel who was neighbour of Michael and informant of the
case in FIR deposed that he saw the unconscious body of Jenny on the floor and Michael
trying to hide the axe in the garden.
The accused Michael took the plea that he was suffering from Bipolar Mood Disorder and for
which he was being treated. He also stated that at the time when Deceased Jenny was
attacked he was suffering from the disorder and he was out of his conscience and he did not
knew the nature of the act and therefore, he could not be made liable by virtue of Section 84
of IPC on ground of insanity.
The defence examined the material witnesses in the court as under:-
Defence Witness1 (DW1)- Dr. Alfered who was treating accused Michael for Bipolar Mood
Disorder stated before the Court that accused Michael was suffering from Bipolar Mood
Disorder and the disorder was sufficient to enable a person to do any violent act under its
influence.
Defence Witness 2 (DW2)- Mathew brother of Michael who stated before the Court that on
various occasions Michael was very much aggressive and violent even for slight reasons.
On 3rd September 2014 Michael was found guilty of intentional murder of Jenny and
convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment.
The accused feeling aggrieved by the said judgment preferred an appeal before the High
Court of Pallaka on dated 9th October 2014 vide Criminal Appeal No. 875/2014. The High
Court relying on the version of the doctor treating the accused for Bipolar Mood Disorder
found that the accused at the time of committing crime was suffering from both legal and
medical insanity and accordingly the Court acquitted the accused from the charge of murder
on dated 5th September 2016.
State of Pallaka preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court of Amphissa against the order
of acquittal by the High Court of Pallaka on 17th of November 2016.
The case of State of Pallaka vs. Michael is listed before the Divisional Bench of Supreme
Court of Amphissa for final hearing on 10th Jan.2017. The respective counsels are expected to
submit their considerations on the following issues:-
1. Whether sufficient ground of legal insanity exists so as to exonerate the accused from
liability of murder.
2. Whether the burden of proof of legal insanity on the part of Defence is at par with
burden of proof on part of Prosecution.
3. The parties may raise any other issue on the given facts to advance arguments upon.
_________________________x___________________x_______________________

Moot Problem No. 2

The facts stated in the present case are fictitious and have been drafted solely for the purposes
of the competition. The Facts, names, locations and dates bear no resemblance to any person,
event or happening whether dead or alive. Any resemblance found, if any, is purely co-
incidental. The real names used in the problem are specifically for the purposes of the moot.
No real incidents can be attached to them. This problem does not intend to hurt the feelings of
any section of society or to offend any person. The Republic of Windia is a peaceful country
with similar law and customs as applicable in the India. In the mentioned country, there is a
City of Shipla, where a matrimonial knot was tied between Jones & Stephanie who got
married on 23.10.2000 in an arranged marriage system. Within two years of marriage,
Stephanie conceived a baby boy with special needs. The increased expenses primarily
because of the treatment of the child led to mismanagement of financial expenditure. Jones
was not able to cope up with the stress and started an addiction of alcohol which led to
constant heavy quarrels and aggressive arguments between the couple. Over time the
problems between the couples only increased. Every day from the office Jones would return
drunk and heavy quarrels would follow. For almost six months after the birth of the boy this
situation continued. For that period Stephanie hid the ongoing problems from her in laws and
her parents in the hope that things will get better. Stephanie tried to talk sense with Jones
whenever he was in his senses and asked him to concentrate on his responsibilities, but
everything was futile. On January 2nd , 2003 Jones came home after heavy consumption of
liquor and after a very aggressive argument with Stephanie, he started beating her and left her
with bruises on the leg and swollen left cheek. The present incident and worsening financial
hardship forced Stephanie to confess everything to her in-laws & to her parents. Due to
efforts of both the families and because of the promise of financial aid, Jones vowed to quit
drinking and concentrate on his family. But in late May 2005 Jones changed his job & went
to take a new job with a promotion which considerably improved his financial condition. The
Couple was leading a happy life. Also, after seeing the better financial condition in July 2005
the financial support from the parents of the couple stopped. Later in that year Jones again
picked up the habit of drinking and by December 2005 the relationship between the couple
started to get effected because of constant quarrels and aggressive arguments. The reason was
again the alcohol addiction of Jones. Then the history repeated as again Jones was quarreling
with Stephanie. There was a series of fights which later turned into physical quarrels in which
Jones was beating Stephanie. On January 5th , 2006, Stephanie felt that she has had enough
and then decided to tell everything to her in laws & to her parents. However, this she was not
able to as she was stopped by Jones who physically assaulted her and threatened her that if
she tried to tell anything to her parents again then he will kill the child and solve all the
problems then and there. After that day, beating became a usual practice and on several
occasions, Jones also had sexual intercourse with Stephanie without her consent. Under threat
and for protection of her child Stephanie decided not to share the problem and endured the
beating, harassment and rape by her husband which became a usual practice. On night of 21
March 2006 again Jones came drunk at home and started beating Stephanie due to which she
sustained certain injuries on her body. The beating continued till 11:00 pm after which Jones
went to his room & slept. However, Stephanie was not able to sleep the entire night, she was
thinking & weeping on her situation, in her drawing room there were series of thoughts in her
mind like about her life, her child & about promises of good life made to her by her husband.
In the early morning of 22 March 2006 around 4 am, she took Iron rod in her hand & went to
her bed room and inflicted injuries on Jones’s head & vital body parts which resulted into
death of Jones on the spot. Stephanie then at 6:30 am went to the room and inflicted a hit on
the head of her child which resulted in the death of the child on the spot. After all this she sat
in her drawing room holding Iron rod in her hand. Later, when around 8:00 am when her
maid came & saw everything, she immediately called the police & Stephanie was arrested.
Husband Jones and the child was taken to hospital, where they were declared brought dead in
the hospital. Police started inquires & case was filed against Stephanie. During the trial in the
session wife was held not liable for murder on the ground that she acted under the grave and
sudden provocation and is thus liable for culpable homicide. However, the Shipla High Court
convicted Stephanie for Murder. Now, Stephanie has filed an appeal before Hon’ble Supreme
Court of Windia. Keeping in mind all the aforementioned points and any other relevant
points, the grounds for filing of appeal, prepare the issues and arguments from both the sides.
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No.3

1. Mr. Joe Cornell was a citizen of the Republic of Ordana, residing in Montawa, a city of
State Tahoma. He was the Chief Executive Officer of a leading multinational company, Arin
Technologies. Just like any other day, on 05.01.2021, Mr. Cornell had left home in his car at
nine a.m. for his office. But he never reached there. Instead, at about one p.m., his wife, Mrs.
Osaka Cornell, received a call from the Station House Officer, Montawa Police Station,
informing her that Mr. Cornell had been killed.
2. Mrs. Osaka Cornell lodged a complaint and the Station House Officer registered a First
Information Report at Montawa Police Station (F.I.R. No. 13/2021 was filed under Sections
302 and 201, Ordana Penal Code,1860). She informed the police that her husband was
wearing a white shirt, black trousers and a blue sweater. She also mentioned that Mr. Cornel
was carrying his laptop when he left home.
3. Inspector Michael Watson prepared the seizure memo of items recovered from the place
where Mr. Cornell was found murdered. No laptop was recovered. The deceased was wearing
white shirt and black trousers when his body was found. Sub-Inspector Hillary Duck prepared
the inquest report under the instruction of Inspector Michael Watson. Thereafter, Inspector
Michael sent the dead body for a post-mortem with a constable. Dr. Larry John conducted the
post-mortem of the body and found that the death of the deceased was a result of ante-
mortem injuries. The injuries were three gunshot wounds and two incised wounds.
4. On 06.03.2021, Sub-Inspector Hillary Duck along with other police officers, apprehended
a car after an informer told her that a vehicle, perceived to be stolen by the Faculty of Law,
Aligarh Muslim University, would come from the direction of Strand Road. The person
driving the car told Sub-Inspector Hillary Duck that his name was Rambo Scott. When he
was searched, the police recovered a .32 calibre pistol with four live cartridges in a seven shot
magazine from the pocket of his trousers. The police arrested Rambo Scott.
5. On 08.03.2021, Mrs. Osaka Cornell identified the car as the one her husband owned and
was driving on the day he was killed. As described by Mrs. Osaka, the aluminium stick was
also found in the car that Mr. Osaka used to keep underneath his seat for self defence. Mrs.
Osaka produced a copy of the Registration Certificate of the car. The police got the chassis
number from the car using a tracing paper. They matched with the number provided in the
Registration Certificate. Inspector Michael Watson prepared the identification memo of the
car of the deceased.
6. The police recorded the confession statement of Rambo Scott on 15.03.2021. He said that
his friend Austin Baker and Austin’s brother Simon Baker came to meet him, at his house, at
three p.m. on 05.01.2021 and told him that the car was Simon’s car and was involved in an
accident. Austin and Simon requested Rambo to keep the car with him for a few days. Simon
used Rambo’s toilet and after he was done, Austin took out a laptop from the car and they left
with the laptop. After they left, Rambo’s wife went to the toilet and found a blue sweater.
Rambo called Simon to ensure if he had left the sweater; Simon, though acknowledging that
it belongs to him, asked Rambo to keep it. After seven-eight days, when Rambo visited
Austin’s house, Austin told him that the car belonged to one Mr. Joe Cornell and that he
along with Simon had murdered Mr. Cornell. Though looking furious, looking deep into the
eyes of Rambo, Austin laughed. After this conversation, Rambo felt paranoid, but he smiled.
When police took Rambo to his house, Rambo opened his almirah and gave the blue sweater
to the police. Mrs. Osaka confirmed that the sweater was of the same size and colour that Mr.
Osaka wore the day he was killed. On 22.03.2021, Rambo was produced before the Judicial
Magistrate Mary Bishop and she recorded his judicial confession under Section 164 CrPc.
7. On 16.03.2021, Inspector Michael Watson and his team went to Austin’s house to arrest
him. But Austin was not there. One Mr. Robin Gardner Austin’s next-door neighbour, told
the police that he saw Ms. Lily Baker, Austin’s sister burning a laptop in the outdoor
fireplace established in the garden of Austin’s house. Inspector Michael Watson found the
charred remains of what were perceived to be some electronic components from the spot
indicated by Mr. Robin Gardner.
8. Austin and Simon were arrested a day later. Both were interrogated separately. Simon
stated in his statement recorded by the Police that he had neither committed any murder nor
did he give any car to Rambo. On the other hand, Austin took the police to his house and
showed a finger in the direction of his cupboard, stating, “The pistol my brother owns is in
that cupboard. Yes, we killed Joe Cornell and took his money. He had a lot of money!”
Inspector Michael Watson prepared the recovery memo of the .32 calibre pistol recovered
from the house of Austin.
9. On the day of his arrest, Austin’s school principal also handed over the attendance register
of his class to the police. Austin was marked absent in the register on 05.01.2021.
10. On 17.03.2021, Renowned Forensic science expert Dr. Malcolm Hunt from Central
Forensic Science Laboratory stated in his report that the burnt remains might be those of a
laptop. One of the components found burned was a battery cell, which is used in the batteries
of laptops, but the same may also be found in power banks.
11. The Police filed the charge-sheet against Simon and Austin under Sections 302, 397, 201
r/w 34, Ordana Penal Code, 1860 & against Rambo under Section 201, 202, 404 and 411,
Ordana Penal Code, 1860 and Lily under Sections 201 and 202, Ordana Penal Code, 1860.
12. Austin was declared a juvenile, and his trial is still going on in the juvenile court of
Montawa. Only Simon, Rambo and Lily were tried by the Sessions Judge at Montawa.
During the examination of witnesses Mr. Gardner was declared a hostile witness as he stated
that he had never told the police about the laptop and that the police had made him sign on a
blank paper.
13. In their statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, 1973 Simon and Rambo said, “I
don’t know”, in reply to all the questions put to them. In her statement recorded under
Section 313 CrPC, 1973 Lily stated that she had not burned any laptop as claimed by Mr.
Gardner. She said Mr. Gardner used to pass lewd remarks towards her, and since she did not
respond to his advances, he lied to the police.
14. The Sessions Judge convicted Rambo and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for
three years and Rs. 2000 as fine and in default, one month of simple imprisonment under
Section 201 OPC, 1860, six months of rigorous imprisonment under Section 202 OPC, 1860,
one year of rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 1000 fine and in default, one month of simple
imprisonment under Section 404 OPC,1860 and one year of rigorous imprisonment under
Section 411 OPC,1860.
15. The Sessions Judge acquitted Simon and Lily for the lack of evidence on the ground that
the murder weapon was recovered from the possession of a juvenile accused who was still
being tried, and the judicial confession of a co-accused cannot be relied upon for convicting
Simon Baker. Similarly, the court held that since Mr. Gardner turned hostile, sufficient
evidence was not available to convict Lily Baker.
16. State of Tahoma challenged the acquittal of Simon and Lily before the Hon’ble High
Court of Tahoma in an appeal. The case State of Tahoma v. Simon & Anr. is now listed for
final hearing before a Division Bench.
For the purposes of this moot problem statement, Ordana Penal Code, 1860 or OPC, 1860
and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or CrPC, 1973 of the Republic of Ordana are in pari
materia with the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as
applicable to the whole of India respectively.
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 4

Nalini, a 28 year old Software Engineer was working with one BPO Company Pune. She
used to travel to her workplace and back by her company transport or Public Transport of by
an Auto Rickshaw. On the evening of 07/10/2019 i.e. the day of the incident as she was
working till late she missed the company transport and therefore near Reliance Mall on Nagar
road she accepted the offer of lift by Sachin Mishra – Accused no. 1 in the cab driven by
himself and in which the other two accused viz. Vikram Jadhav Accused no. 2 (Security
Guard) and Aniket Salwi Accused no. 3 were already sitting and present in the cab. They
promised to take her to her house in Katraj whereupon she placed total trust on these
strangers. However, the brutes took advantage of the fact of her being the only woman in the
cab, they abducted her to satisfy their insatiable lust. She was stripped naked and kept in that
condition for hours committing gang rape on her repeatedly. They picked up Nalini from
Reliance Mall and subsequently drove her to Hadapsar by Magarpatta and from there
onwards to Manjari Phata and then to Abalwadi. There onwards accused took her to Shankar
Parvati Mangal Karyalaya on Nagar Road where they raped her. In mean time T. Ramlinga
(Approver) joined them and he too raped Nalini. Then they drove to Dargah at Chandan
Nagar where the four and further to Vadu Fata by Markal Road where they raped her again.
Thereafter they drove her to Zarevedi Fata where the accused Sachin Mishra, Vikram Jadhav,
aniket Salwi brutally killed her by first strangulating her by dupatta and then by crushing her
face and head with heavy stones to camouflage her identity in order to destroy the evidence.
However, Nalini’s parents successfully followed up with the investigation team and upon
registration of the crime on 08/10/0219 and with assistance of further investigation all
accused person were arrested on 14/10/2019. The Trial took place against all these accused in
the Trial Court, Pune. Trio accused in this case were held guilty for the Gang Rape and
murder and all the three accused were sentenced to death U/S 376 (A), 397, 302, 404, 120(B)
of IPC for this horrific crime vide order dated 20/07/2021. But T. Ramalinga (Approver) was
sentenced to 7 years imprisonment. All the three accused filed an appeal in the Bombay High
Court against the decision of the Trial Court Pune to set aside the conviction and sentence.
Issues are as follows –
1. Whether the appeal against conviction is maintainable?
2. Whether the accused conspired to commit the said crimes and in pursuance of this
conspiracy they carried out the criminal acts as charged by the prosecution?
3. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt the common intention of the
accused by bringing on record that the said acts were committed by several persons in
furtherance of their common intention?
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 5

1. Mr. Kishan Juneja is an Indian film director and producer and is also the Managing
Director of Kalka Films Pvt Ltd. He is ranked amongst the top film-makers of the country
and is also said to be the highest paid directors in India. He is known for making films on
issues of social relevance and is acclaimed to be one of the best directors when it comes to
portraying sensitive themes on-screen. On January 15, 2017, Mr. Kishan announced that he
will be making his next film on the issue of homosexuality where he would show the real-life
challenges of homosexual couples in India.
2. Mr. Kishan then signed Anant Kapoor and Sultan Sheriff, for the main lead roles and
Ananya Khurana for the lead female role in the film. It was speculated that this film with a
top-class director along with top actors of Bollywood was definitely going to be the biggest
hit of 2018. Mr. Kishan and his team did extensive research on this issue for the next six
months and the shooting began in August, 2017. In April, 2018 a news channel interviewed
Mr. Kishan on what he intends to put forth in his upcoming film and whether the title of the
film has been decided. Mr. Kishan replied, ‘My next movie shall be called Being Gay and
shall talk about how homosexual couples face socio religious intolerance in Indian society.’
3. The interview went viral on the internet and soon several religious organisations were seen
issuing statements against the film arguing that insult to their religions, in any form, is
intolerable. Himadri Seni, a member of the Hindu Bhai Sabha, issued a statement that ‘Hindu
religion has no place for homosexuality and that no film-maker can be allowed to hurt their
community’s religious sentiments, and if the movie is released, all who are involved in this
movie will face serious consequences. Bismil Khan, a Moulvi, issued a Fatwa that ‘this film
is an insult to Islam and if the film is promoted and released, the film-maker and all actors
should be ready for any adverse consequences including death penalty.’
4. Despite resistance from religious groups, Mr. Kishan continued with the shooting of his
film and was continuously quoted saying that ‘the film does not hurt any religious sentiments,
neither does it target any particular religion and that religious groups should first see the
movie before making such adverse remarks.’ The shooting of the movie was completed in
August, 2018 and the film was submitted to the Central Board of Film Certification on
October 3, 2018. Immediately, the opposition from religious groups began to grow and they
demanded a nation-wide ban of the film. On October 15, 2018 five Chief Ministers declared
that ‘the film shall be banned in their respective states, even if it gets clearance from the
Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), since there is reasonable apprehension of breach
of peace in their states rendering the ban necessary.’
5. On October 31, 2018, CBFC notified that Being Gay has been denied certification on the
ground that ‘human sensibilities may be offended since the film’s content was vulgar and
obscene’ and gave Mr. Kishan fifteen days time to represent his case before the CBFC. On
November 5, 2018, Kalka Films Pvt Ltd. released the online trailer of Being Gay on their
website seeking the opinion of public in this regard. Within the next two hours of its
uploading, the video was shared by around 55,000 people from all religions and gender,
wherein 80% of the viewers thought the movie to be pro-society and favoured its release. On
the other hand, protests in favour and against the release of the film started occurring. On
November 6, 2018, during one such protest in the state of Uttar Pradesh, the protestors
against the movie turned violent resulting in clashes and death of two persons and another ten
persons being severely injured. On November 7, 2018 Mr. Kishan appeared before CBFC to
defend his film where he argued that the movie did not hurt the tenets of any religion and that
the physical intimacy shown in his movie was very less as compared to those shown in
movies that have previously been certified and cleared by the CBFC. He further pleaded to
the CBFC to consider the public opinion on his film on his website. But CBFC rejected all
contentions of Mr. Kishan and notified on November 28, 2018 that,
‘The film ‘Being Gay’ has been denied Certification by the CBFC and shall not be exhibited
in any theatres or online platforms across India. Reasons stated are;
i. Depicting physical intimacy between homosexual couples may deprave the moral standards
of the Indian society and corrupt the minds of the audience and
hence is obscene.
ii. Since homosexuality is disapproved by all major religions in India, its depiction in any
manner whatsoever amounts to [Link]. The online public opinion cannot be a yardstick
for Certification and CBFC is under no liability to consider the public opinion in its decision
process.
iv. Since the film has been denied certification, the release of its trailer or any advertising
material on online platforms is illegal and should be immediately withdrawn.
6. On November 29, 2018, Mr. BaijuNath, Chief Minister of the state of Uttar Pradesh issued
a statement that ‘in light of the violent incidents that have occurred due to the film Being
Gay, the film shall be banned in the state of Uttar Pradesh, even though it might be cleared by
the CBFC. The Minister further said that his Government is under constitutional duty to
protect the culture, beliefs, life and property of general public and hence the security of his
state and of its people comes before any film or any filmmaker’s rights.’ Few other Chief
Ministers were also quoted endorsing the views of Mr. BaijuNath. On December 2, 2018, Mr.
Kishan met the CBFC Chairperson and expressed his protest and anguish over CBFC’s order
on his film, calling the decision arbitrary, unreasonable and biased. He told the Chairperson
that he would appeal against the order, and that he would not remove the trailer from the
website since the jurisdiction of the CBFC did not extend to content on internet and he was
free to upload any part of the film or the trailer on the internet.
7. Mr. Kishan appealed before the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) against the
decision of the CBFC, on December 10, 2018. FCAT, after hearing the matter upheld the
decision of the CBFC. The Tribunal also directed Kalka Films and Mr. Kishan to remove the
trailer from the website since it was illegal to exhibit an uncertified movie or anything related
to it, on any media whatsoever. In the meantime, on December 7, 2018, Mr. Himadri Seni
from Hindu Bhai Sabha filed a FIR against Mr. Kishan, Anant Kapoor, Sultan Shariff and
Ananya Khurana under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. Kishan thus filed an
Appeal before the Bombay High Court against the order of the CBFC, being in violation of
his Fundamental rights with a request to issue directions to the concerned State Governments
to not ban the screening of his film in their respective states. In the same petition, he also
requested the Court to quash the FIR filed by Hindu Bhai Sabha and the fatwa issued against
him and others of his team stating that his movie is not in violation of law of the land. The
High Court admitted his petition and the matter has been listed for hearing. Law in force in
India is applicable for the argument. The teams are expected to present arguments on the
following issues:
1. Whether the order of CBFC, denying certification to the film 'Being Gay', is arbitrary and
violative of fundamental rights of the Appellants?
2. Whether the Appellants are liable for selling and promoting obscenity through the film
'Being Gay'?
3. Whether online release of the trailer of the film 'Being Gay' by the Appellants is illegal?
4. Whether the action of Respondent State Governments to ban screening of the concerned
film in their respective states unconstitutional and ultra vires of the Constitution of India?
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 6

Mrs. Gaurangi visited a reputed maternity care home named SUNRISE HOSPITAL,
INDORE on February 25th, 2012 for consultation and treatment about her pregnancy, Dr.
Harseeta examined her and confirmed pregnancy. Dr. Harseeta after examination confirmed
and informed her that it was a normal pregnancy and assured her nothing to worry about it
and prescribing her certain health supplements. Mrs. Gaurangi was under treatment of
Sunrise Hospital from February 25th, 2012 to March 16th, 2012 where Dr. Harseeta was the
consultant and treating doctor. During this Period from time to time she visited the hospital
for further checkup as suggested by Dr. Harseeta. The doctor time and again assured her that
pregnancy was absolutely normal. Mrs. Gaurangi felt severe abdominal pain as also slight
bleeding, so she again visited the said hospital on March 17 th, 2012 for consultation and
treatment. On the basis of certain diagnostic tests and examinations carried out by the
hospital, which were recommended by the treating doctor, certain medicines were prescribed
by Dr. Henery of the said hospital, on the instructions of Dr. Harseeta. She was called for
further follow up after 15 days.
Mrs. Gaurangi started having abdominal pain also spotted blood, therefore she visited the
hospital on April 2nd, 2012 for further treatment. After examination Dr. Harseeta advised her
some further tests which were done outside the hospital by another diagnostic centre, as
recommended by the treating doctor. After studying these reports Dr. Harseeta declared that
Gaurangi has suffered a miscarriage and advised her to undergo the process of Dilation and
Curettage (hereinafter referred to as D&C). On April 3 rd, 2012 D&C was performed in the
Sunrise Hospital and treating doctor Harseeta discharged her on the very same day. No
tissues or Retained Products of Conception (hereinafter referred to as RPOC) were found
during the process of D&C for which it is usually preformed. In discharge summary
incomplete abortion was mentioned.
Even after this process and before discharge the patient Mrs. Gaurangi complained of
constant abdominal pain and flow of blood which was termed as normal by the doctor and
assured the patient that everything is normal. The treating doctor advised follow up after
seven days.
The patient visited the above named hospital on April 17 th, 2012 in the state of emergency
complaining of severe pain and bleeding for which the duty doctor prescribed certain
medicines and pain killer and informed the patient that this problem is due to uterine
infection.
The patient’s condition was deteriorating which she could not stand and was on a wheel chair
all the time but instead of admitted her as indoor patient for treatment she was advised to go
home ignoring her serious condition.
The next day as the patient was still having severe abdominal pain and bleeding she consulted
the treating doctor Dr. Harseeta of Sunrise Hospital on cell phone and informed her about
pain and suffering for which the doctor advised a pain killer injection, which was injected to
her but the patient had no relief.
On April 18th, 2012 the patient still suffering from abdominal pain and bleeding consulted
another Dr. Parneeta of maternity help centre named Patel Hospital where she was diagnosed
with “Extra Uterine Ectopic Pregnancy” which is not a normal pregnancy in medical
terminology. On a query from Dr. Parneeta the patient informed her above the treatment
given to her by Sunrise Hospital. Dr. Parneeta was of the opinion that the D&C done at
Sunrise Hospital was not at all required and the patient ought to have been treated for Ectopic
Pregnancy.
Dr. Parneeta and other doctors at Patel Hospital advised for Ultra Sonography (hereinafter
referred to us USG), which was done. The USG showed severally ruptured fallopian tube and
huge formation of blood clots. The doctors sensing the severity of situation removed the
fallopian tube of the patient by surgical operation, to save the life of patient.
On April 20th, 2014 the patient filed a claim for damages to the tune of Rs. 50, 00,000/-
before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as State
Commission) on the ground of negligence in treatment and compensation etc.
In reply Sunrise Hospital stated that every reasonable care has been taken during the
treatment of patient Mrs. Gaurangi and there was no negligence on the part of treating doctors
at the hospital. The USG was advised by the treating doctor and as the Radiographer of the
hospital was on leave the patient was advised to get the USG done from any diagnostic centre
of her choice. This USG showed minimal ROPC interior cavity, both adnexa normal which
means a technically uterine pregnancy with spontaneous miscarriage. The report did not
disclose any extra uterine pregnancy; no retained products were seen inside uterus. Therefore
D&C was advised. This procedure being day care and patient being vitally stable and
comfortable was given then best treatment and there was no negligence on the part of any
doctor of the Hospital as such the claim be dismissed with costs being false & vexations. The
Hospital also pleaded that the claim is barred by limitation prescribed under the law.
The State Commission dismissed the claim of the claimant on the grounds that there was no
negligence on the part of treating doctors as also the claim having being barred by limitation.
Dissatisfied by this verdict of the State Commission the claimant patient approached the
National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as National
Commission). The National Commission reverted the findings of the State Commission
holding the doctors guilty of negligence and awarded a sum of Rs. 25, 00,000/- to the
claimant on account of compensation and also found the complaint to be within the
prescribed period of limitation.
The Hospital, feeling arrived by the verdict of National Commission filed an appeal before
Court is to hear the parties on following issues-
1. Was there any professional negligence on the part of treating Doctors?
2. Whether the claim is within limitation prescribed by law?
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 7

1. Mandiana is a country in South Asia, having a population of over 140 crore. It is a country
which got independence from British after the end of the Second World War. It has unique
and distinct features having people of various religious beliefs, faiths, caste, creed along with
their myriad social credence and rituals. The country along within its geographical limits is
divided into various states. The country having a federal polity, a written constitution
vouched by its people to make it a socialist secular democratic republic. The country treats
alike people of all faith, and there is no uniform civil code in the country of Mandiana.13
2. Mandiana is a multi party democracy. Since independence, Mandiana has experienced
various political movements and upheavals regarding various demands, and the state of
Mandiana aptly engaged and tried to bring a political solution to each of such demands within
its existing constitutional framework. In its entire political history of being an independent,
sovereign state, national emergency was issued once for about 20( twenty months),but
common people, public spirited lawyers, politicians fought on streets and legal battles in
constitutional courts to bring back its democratic polity.
3. Mandiana kept experiencing an unbated increase in crime rate every year. These crimes
majorly included offences against women, children and terrorist activities. As per the
National Criminal Records Bureau (“NCRB”), these offences grew by 500% between the
year 2015 and 2020. Mandiana had special laws to deal with terrorist activities but they were
rarely pressed into action. These laws included Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967
(“UAPA”); National Investigative Agencies Act, 2008 (“NIA Act”).
4. Arnab Nandi is pursuing his studies in law from a government college in the city of
Westhall which is supposed to be the cultural capital of Mandiana. West hall is the capital
city of Calicus, a state situated on the eastern borders of Mandiana. He also runs his own
twitter handle where he posts his comments which are majorly critiques of the government
both at the State & Union. Arnab as a person is very opiniated and have an independent view
on various social and political issues.
5. Recently the state of Calicus saw and experienced a mass teacher recruitment scam where
money worth rupees crores were seized from of its officials and their acquaintances of the
Teacher recruitment board. An acquaintance of a very highranking official of the Teacher
recruitment board involved in the recruitment scam was arrested and cash worth rupees 50
(fifty) crore was seized from her apartment. Almost all High echelons of the teacher
recruitment board along with its minister were arrested. Monies worth rupees 500 crores were
recovered from various places with an insinuation that more is likely to be recovered. The
Central agencies were called upon, but after the media attention died down the investigation
was carried out in a snail’s space, and the genuine teacher candidates were left in lurch.
6. Arnab Nandi has been a staunch proponent of protection of rights. He has gained
popularity in state of Calicus due to his constant presence on his twitter. On 14 20.04.2022,
he posted a blog on his twitter which was titled as “DO AWAY WITH THE PRESENT
STATE AND UNION GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY “…..that scam happens to be the
order of the day. The biggest beneficiaries’ of the scams are high ranking officials and
ministers, who from this ill- gotten money buy comforts of life, win elections, buys people’s
mandate, sent their children to Europe and America for education., their medical expenses are
billed in the best private facilities of the world, only to see all our institutions, be it health or
education becomes feckless and inept progressing towards state paralysis. He summed up by
saying as both the Governments are hands in gloves and the judiciary intimidated so no
justice should be expected.” His post received both hot and cold responses. Arnab also said
that soon he shall plan a peaceful protest against the rampant corruption of both the
government. Rumours spread that he is planning an unlawful assembly. Based on the cryptic
information received by the police, his calls were being intercepted.
7. On 26.04.2022, Arnab Nandi posted on his social media accounts that he is planning to
stage a peaceful protest along with his activist friends in the capital city of Westhall and
requested all others to join him. The same day many protestors gathered in large numbers.
The protests continued for a few days and during the protest Arnab gave several speeches
before the mass gathering requesting them to keep raising their voices against the arbitrary
and unconstitutional acts of the government. He also said we should keep fighting at all costs
and must do whatever it takes. He promised to provide all the logistical support to the
protestors. One of the protestors recorded his video and posted the clippings of such video on
social media. Thereafter, few reports of violence were reported in the adjoining district. The
police then reached the protest spot to stop the protest; however, there were physical
altercations. The reason for the physical altercation is unclear. The entire incident also got
large media coverage from the print to television to digital news outlets/platforms.
8. Arnab Nandi was arrested from the protest site and an FIR [FIR No. 37/2022] was
registered against him under Sections 13, 16, of the UAPA; Sections r/w section 124A of
IPC. The Union Government on request of the State Government directed the National
Investigation Agency (“NIA”) to carry out further investigation in the matter. Case diaries
and all materials collected by the police including the call 15 recordings were handed over to
NIA. While the investigation was pending, Arnab bail application was rejected by the Special
Court constituted under the NIA Act.
9. During investigation Arnab admitted that the contents of video clipping shared online and
his twitter handle were true but were being quoted out of context. After the interrogations got
completed by NIA Arnab was remanded to judicial custody. While investigation was
pending, the Special Court allowed the NIA officers to collect voice samples from the
accused in order to match it with the call recordings which had incriminating conversations.
10. The Special Court took cognizance against Arnab based on the chargesheet submitted by
the NIA. While taking cognizance, the court framed all the charges which were pressed in
FIR .
[Link] prosecution submitted video clippings which were shared online as evidence. The
prosecution also submitted newspaper articles which stated that protesters led by Arnab
caused disruptions in public places. The transcriptions of conversation and call recordings
were submitted in a pen-drive along with an electronic evidence certificate u/s 65B(4) of
Evidence Act, 18723 (“IEA”). The copy of electronic evidence was given to the accused after
the commencement of trial.
12. After the prosecution evidence was closed, the Special Court examined Arnab Nandi u/s
313 of CrPC. Arnab informed that he is innocent as he has only staged a peaceful protest. He
further informed that he was subject to custodial violence and certain inculpatory statements
were elicited from him. Thereafter, during the defence evidence stage, Arnab submitted that
the call recordings merely contain his conversations with friends about his regular college
days, sundry talks about political and social issues of the country and his daily endeavours,
both in college and outside college, and such conversations are insufficient to prove his guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. He also submitted that the video clippings are being shown out of
context. Moreover, the newspapers articles are nothing but an exaggeration of facts, and
public disruptions were caused by some other fringe elements that came only to disrupt the
peaceful protest. Moreover he contested the fact that in present time when technology has
provided social platform where you can engage with people all around the globe, you get
comments which are sometimes unsolicited, but never to overpower a democratically elected
government. He also submitted that people on the streets were out of sheer frustration of the
mass recruitment scam, and they are youth who are 16 jobless and due their exuberance, the
streets got filled. The government out of fear of growing unpopularity and to tame the protest
the government has brought the charges against [Link] all through the trial maintained
that it was his fundamental right to protest and moreover sedition laws have been abolished in
most democratic nations and the draconian laws are designed to quell peaceful protest and
silence government detractors.
13. After hearing the final arguments, the Special Court found that the prosecution has
established its case beyond reasonable doubt. While convicting Arnab Nandi, the court
heavily relied upon the electronic evidence and the same was weighed as primary evidence.
The court also relied on the newspaper cuttings and the version of the investigating agency.
The court further stated that the defence has failed to disprove the onus and their story fails to
inspire confidence. The court also found that Arnab’s post and speeches were directly
connected with the unlawful activity and violence. Arnab preferred an appeal against
conviction before the High Court. However, the High Court confirmed the conviction and
held that there is no reason to interfere with the order of the Special Court.
14. Arnab Nand now files an SLP [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 198 of 2023] under
Article 136 against the impugned order of the High Court which upheld conviction by the
Special Trial Court. In addition to various other grounds challenging their conviction, the
appellant-accused submitted that the Special Court, by convicting, and the High Court by
confirming the conviction, committed a gross miscarriage of justice by wrongly applying
legal principles and statutes. The SLP was listed before the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the
following issues were framed in the respective petitions:
a. Whether section 124A of IPC is hit by fundamental rights of Indian Constitution?
b. Whether Sedition Laws violates the Doctrine of Basic Structure of the Constitution of
India and the Rule of Law?
c. Whether the trial court erred in applying the procedural laws correctly based on the facts
and circumstances of the case?17
d. Whether the special Court erred in convicting Arnab Nandi for the offences u/s 13, 16 of
UAPA; r/w section 124 A of IPC?
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________
Moot Problem No. 8

Mr. Ashok Shah, Mr. Rajesh Singh, Mr. Manik Jain, Ms. Shruti Kapoor, Mr. Sandeep Borse,
Mr. Karan Khanna and Mr. S. Shaikh were the members of governing body of a renowned
Jagran Public Charitable Trust (JPCT). Mr. Ashok Shah was the Chairman of the Trust. Mr.
Rajesh Singh was a trustee by virtue of his post as Executive Secretary. As per its objectives
JPCT was engaged in running of various schools, hostels and hospitals. JPCT also ownedvast
agricultural land and commercial complexes which formed part of the income of the Trust.
Since the Trust property was spread in seven different places situated in three different
districts, the trustees shared the responsibility of managing various units called “Station”. Mr.
Ashok Shah was also responsible as manager of one such Unit at Devnagar which had an
English medium school, a vernacular language school, dispensary, agricultural land,
residential quarters, commercial complex and a hostel for 300 students. There was regular
income at this station in the form of fees of students studying in school, agricultural produce,
patients availing dispensary facilities, hostel inmates and rent of workers’ quarters and
commercial complex. The Governing body was divided into two groups - Mr. Ashok Shah,
Mr. Karan Khanna and Mr. S. Shaikh on one side and Mr. Manik Jain, Ms. Shruti Kapoor
and Mr. Sandeep Borse on the other side. The latter was headed by Mr. Manik Jain. Group of
Mr. Manik Jain was trying hard to get into power and therefore they wanted to remove Mr.
Ashok Shah as Chairman of the trust. To achieve their purpose, they incited Ms. Shruti
Kapoor to make allegations of sexual harassment against Mr. Ashok Shah. On the other hand,
Mr. Ashok Shah and group came up with a plan where they made Mr. Ashok Shah agree to
write a suicide note alleging Mr. Manik Jain and group responsible for his suicide. They put
up a drama of suicide thus fixing Mr. Manik Jain and group on charges of abetment to
commit suicide. The Trust held an agricultural land near an upcoming Special Economic
Zone (SEZ) and therefore the land got attention of many builders. Mr. Manik Jain, Ms. Shruti
Kapoor and Mr. Sandeep Borse wanted to sell the Trust land at the prevailing market price
but Mr. Ashok Shah objected to the same and as a result the sale did not materialize. Thirty
people viz. workers and residents of Devnagar Station reported to the Executive Secretary
Mr. Rajesh Singh on 10th October 2011 that Mr. Ashok Shah as a manager of the station was
engaged in embezzlement of funds. They pointed out that he had taken illegal gratification
from the parents to get their children admitted in schools and hostels. He had sold away
chunk of agricultural produce and had not submitted the amount to Trust’s fund. Similarly,
they pointed out that Mr. Ashok Shah had regularly collected house rent and rent from the
tenants of commercial complex and had not remitted the amount to Trust’s treasury. This
News was flashed widely in local media. After receiving the written complaint, the Executive
Secretary brought the matter to the notice of the Chairman Mr. Ashok Shah and informed him
that since he is having a written complaint against him, he will have to bring the matter in
front of Governing body to be held on 12th November 2011. He further requested Mr. Ashok
Shah to clear the matter before the meeting so that his image was not tarnished. All Members
of Governing Body unanimously supported Mr. Ashok Shah and issued a letter to Mr. Rajesh
Singh condemning the allegations and supporting Mr. Ashok Shah.
On 5th November 2011, Mr. Ashok Shah wrote a letter and kept the same in his office
drawer. The letter contained the statement that in case of his death, Mr. Manik Jain, Ms.
Shruti Kapoor, Mr. Sandeep Borse should be held responsible for his death. According to the
letter, they had been the mastermind behind the complaint and done with sole intention to
defame him. Early morning on 12th November 2011, Mr. Ashok Shah was found hanging
from the roof in the rear room of his house with its main door not latched. On the basis of
preliminary investigation, police prima facie assumed that he had committed suicide. Based
on the note found in his office drawer police filed a charge sheet against Mr. Manik Jain, Mr.
Sandeep Borse, Ms. Shruti Kapoor. They were alleged to have committed an offence u/s. 306
read with Sec. 34 of IPC. The Trial Court convicted Mr. Manik Jain, Ms. Shruti Kapoor and
Mr. Sandeep Borse. Being aggrieved by the conviction, they preferred an appeal to the High
Court of Gujarat.
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 9

1. Shauryavarsh, also known as the Republic of Shauryavarsh or Shauryavarsh Ganrajya is a

country in Southern part of continent, Jaysia having Indraprastha as it capital. It is the seventh
largest country by area and with more than 10 billion people and it is the most populous
democratic country in the world. Bounded by the Shauryasagar Ocean on the south, the
Buddhisagar Sea on the southwest, and the Bay of Bungpradesh on the southeast, it shares
land borders with Rudeistan to the west; Redland, Lockedland, and Happyland to the
northeast; and Chotadesh and Yourmar to the east. In the Shauryasagar Ocean, Shauryavarsh
is in the vicinity of Srimant Lanka and the Maldeep Islands, while its Mahaman and Jazzybar
Islands share a maritime border with ThaiPradesh and Indorinesia.
2. The Shauryavarshian subcontinent was home to the urban Siddhi Valley Civilisation of the
3rd millennium BCE. In the following millennium, the oldest scriptures associated with
Siddhism began to be composed. Early political consolidations took place under the Zorobian
and Groupian empires; later peninsular Middle Kingdoms influenced cultures as far as
Southeast Jaysia. In the medieval era Rudaism, Astrianism, Ristianity, Lam and
Seekhavatism emerged, all adding to the region's diverse culture. Much of the north fell to the
Vaishali Sultanate; the south was united under the Sujayayanagara Empire. The economy
expanded in the 17th century in the Roughal Empire. In the mid-18th century, the
subcontinent came under Martian East Shauryavarsh Company rule, and in the mid19th under
Martian crown rule. Anationalist movement emerged in the late 19th century, and led to
Shauryavarsh 's independence in 1947 leading to the creation of two independent dominions,
Shauryavarsh and Rudeistan. The Dominion of Shauryavarsh became, as of 1950, the
Republic of Shauryavarsh, and the Dominion of Rudeistan became, as of 1956, the Lamic
Republic of Rudeistan. In 1971, the People's Republic of Chotadesh came into being after
Chotadesh Liberation War. The partition involved the division of three provinces, Sussam,
Bungpradesh and Punj Pradesh, based on district-wide followers of Siddhism or Lam
majorities. The boundary demarcating Shauryavarsh and Rudeistan came to be known as the
Bluecliff Line. It also involved the division of the Martian Shauryavarshian Army, the Royal
Shauryavarshian Navy, the Shauryavarshian Civil Services, the railways, and the central
treasury, between the two new dominions. The partition was set forth in the Shauryavarsh
Independence Act 1947 and resulted in the dissolution of the Martian Raj, as the Martian
government was called at that time. The two self-governing countries of Rudeistan and
Shauryavarsh legally came into existence at midnight on 18–19 September 1947.
[Link] partition displaced over 18 million people along religious lines, creating overwhelming
refugee crises in the newly constituted dominions; there was large-scale violence, with
estimates of loss of life accompanying or preceding the partition disputed and varying
between several hundred thousand and two million. The violent nature of the partition created
an atmosphere of hostility and suspicion between Shauryavarsh and Rudeistan that plagues
their relationship to the present.
4. In 2019, the Shauryavarshian economy was the world's sixth largest by nominal GDP and
third largest by purchasing power parity. Following market-based economic reforms in 1991,
Shauryavarsh became one of the fastest-growing major economies and is considered a newly
industrialised country. However, it continues to face the challenges of poverty, corruption,
malnutrition, and inadequate public healthcare. A nuclear weapons state and regional power,
it has the second largest standing army in the world and ranks fifth in military expenditure
among nations. Shauryavarsh is a federal republic governed under a parliamentary system
and consists of 39 states and 5 union territories. Apluralistic, multilingual and multi-ethnic
society, it is also home to a diversity of wildlife in a variety of protected habitats.
5. Shauryavarsh has a written constitution, which came into force on 26 January 1950, three
years after its Independence from a 200 years long oppressive & tyrannical foreign rule of
“Martians”. The constituent assembly members of Shauryavarsh were highly influenced by
India and its constitution and have taken, the provisions of Constitution of India 1950
verbatim with other central and state laws. Also various matters decided by the Hon'ble
Supreme court of India and various High Court are regularly referred in the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of Shauryavarsh and various High court at States, which are given due reference for the
laws of Shauryavarsh being pari matria to India.
6. Kashyappur is the northernmost geographical region of the Shauryavarsh subcontinent.
Until the mid-19th century, the term "Kashyappur" denoted only the Kashyappur Valley
between the Great Himvan Range and the Gir Janjal Range. Today, it denotes a larger area
that includes the Shauryavarsh's State of Kashyap Pradesh (which includes the region of
Jammvant Pradesh, Kashyappur Valley, Dadakh and Jiachen region), the Rudeistan Occupied
Kashyappur (ROK) of Swadheen Kashyappur and BilgitGaltistan, and Redland Occupied
Kasyappur of Rksai Gin and the Trans-Laraloram Tract. A special status in the constitution of
Shauryavarsh has been given to the state of Kashyap Pradesh under Article 370 which was
given due to the then circumstances creating a temporary special status for the state and later
on Article 35Acreating certain exception for the state.
7. Since 1947, the greater region of Kashyap Pradesh has been embroiled in a territorial
dispute between Shauryavarsh, Rudeistan and Redland, with Shauryavarsh controlling
approximately 50% of the land area of the region and 80% of its population, Rudeistan
occupying roughly 30% of the land, while Redland occupying the remaining 20%.
Kashyappur is widely regarded as the world's most militarized zone and the region has
witnessed three major wars between Shauryavarsh and Rudeistan, another limited war
between Shauryavarsh and Redland, numerous border skirmishes, high mountainous warfare,
an ongoing insurgency, internal civilian unrest, terrorism, religious & ethnic violence leading
to Siddhi exodus, stone pelting and secessionist activities.
8. On 15 February 2019 during a regular law & order situation, troops of soldiers were sent
by Shauryavarshian government to cope up with the situation of Kashyap Pradesh and
maintain public order and tranquility. The moment they entered the Kashyappur region their
vehicle was attacked by terrorists. In this attack large number of soldiers were martyred and
the attack was considered as one of the biggest attack of decade in the region killing 57
security personnel and leaving more than 20 injured. The responsibility of attack was
immediately taken by the Jaish-e-Jannat, a Rudeistan based, Lamic terrorist organization
headed by Masood Lasgar, a dreaded international terrorist. Avideo of the suicide bomber
named, Sahil Wani Pandat was released, claiming the responsibility of attack for the cause of
religion and religious governance in Kashyappur & in State of Kashyap Pradesh then in the
whole Shauryavarsh and world.
9. The attack was of such a dreaded nature that it led to the whole nation in shock and there
was nationwide anger among the people of Shauryavarsh, who rightfully started to demand
immediate and stringent action from the government against the terrorists and Rudeistan.
[Link] investigation and intelligence report provided to the Shauryavarshian government had
solid inputs and evidences that these terrorists have a connection with the neighboring state of
Rudeistan. The nation witnessed support from all the citizens across the country & people of
all religion, caste & race, displayed their anger and unity by coming out on streets, doing
candle marches, condolence meeting and by supporting the families of martyred soldiers by
monetary contribution through various means.
11. In connection to the above situation, keeping the solidarity with the families of lost heros,
a nationwide “bandh” was called on 20 February 2019 by the Business Association of
Shauryavarsh (BAS), a business associate wing of the current political party, in power, at
centre. 'Bandh' got massive support of the citizens of Shauryavarsh and they voluntarily came
out in solidarity with the families of the lost heros and closed their business premises and
activities for a day.
12. Mr. Khursheed Lone Pandat s/o Mr. Sajjid Lone Pandat (5 times Member of Parliament
from South Jarinagar, Kashyap Pradesh) is a resident of Jarinagar, Kashyap Pradesh. He is an
actor, a movie megastar and a business tycoon having its operation in many movie industries
and business in various sectors like real estate, FMCG, Online retailing, Health Care etc, with
global out reach. He regularly is featured in 'Lime' magazine, a renowned magazine having
high credentials and large outreach and is being followed by more than 2 billion people on
'Rwitter', an internet based social media platform, and was the 'most searched personality' in
the year 2018, declared by online search engine 'Boogle'.
13. On the evening of 20 February 2019, Mr. Khursheed Lone Pandat had planned to throw a
success party of his latest movie which th broke all the previous records of success and has
earned Rs. 700 crores in the opening month. On 18 he got an information from the event
managers and the service providers that on they will not be doing business on the due date in
solidarity with the martyrs' family and their staff will be engaged in other social service
activities. Aggrieved & frustrated by the sudden cancellation, he Rweeted on his social media
page; “I do not encourage this act of declaring band for showcasing one's support towards the
martyrs because it is ultimately affecting the economy and is hurting my country's national
interest. This 'bandh' is just a dictatorial ploy by the government at center to create emotions
in their favour for the upcoming elections. Central Government should not try to sweep its
wrong policies under the carpet. None from the administration is trying to look into the real
reasons behind such acts of defiance by promising youth from my state of Kashyap Pradesh.
#ResistOppression #FightTyranny #CheenKeLengayAzaadi”
14. His rweet got wide circulation. Citizens of Shauryavarsh, form all sects and relegion
started reacting to the above statement and came out on streets against the actor criticizing
him for his insensitive remark and started demanding actions against him. At the same time,
some of them were supporting the actor claiming that actor had all the right to express as
guaranteed by the Shauryavarshian Constitution. Mr. Kaka Kumar, President of Student
Union, Jharjhari Nigam Memorial University (JNMU) is a follower of Mr. Khursheed Lone
Pandat on 'Rwitter' and to the above Rweet, he reRweeted to him the following; “Well said
sir, big fan this side. We will do as expected. #ResistOppression #FightTyranny
#CheenKeLengayAzaadi ” To which Mr. Khursheed replied with a reRweet; “In the words of
Shri S. C. R. Bosee (Freedom fighter of Shauryavarsh): “ तु म मु झेखन ू दो मतुे परू ी आज़ादी
िदलवाऊं गा।” The fight for freedom always demands boiling blood of the young. Thanks
for solidarity. Young activists; or I should better call freedom fighters of Shauryavarsh, like
you should take inspiration from the freedom struggle our forefathers have gone through.
#ResistOppression #FightTyranny #CheenKeLengayAzaadi”
15. On the eve of 20 February 2019, a candle light march concluding with a condolence
prayer was organized by BAS in association with the various universities at Indraprastha,
Capital of Shauryavarsh and National Capital Region. A group of students lead by Mr. Kaka
Kumar, President of Student Union, saw this as an opportunity to get a center stage in the
national political discourse. He asked his followers & party members to meet at Central
Connaught Square, a commercial place, from where the candle light march was supposed to
start, at Indraprastha (& NCR) to oppose, resist & fight the tyrants as called by megastar. The
group lead by Mr. Kumar met at designated place with placards opposing the candle light
march. There was intense argument between the groups, which resulted into violent clashes
and the whole Central Connaught Square was converted into a warzone. District
administration imposed curfew to bring the situation under control. The riot resulted into
death of 17 people including Mr. Kaka Kumar and hundreds were injured. Property,
including Rajan Chowk Metro Station of Indraprastha Metro Rail Corporation (IMRC), worth
thousands of crore was lost due to large-scale vandalism and arson.
16. FIR was filled against Mr. Khursheed Lone Pandat & he was arrested immediately by
Indraprastha Police from his residence at Jarinagar, Kashyap Pradesh. He was charged under
Section 117, 124A, 120B, 153A, of Shauryavarshian Penal Code (equivalent to Indian Penal
Code 1860) read with Section 66A of Shauryavarshian Information Technology Act 2000
(equivalent to Indian Information Technology Act 2000, pre 24/03/2015). District and
Session Court at Laket, Indraprastha found him guilty of the above charges and convicted
him.
17. Aggrieved from the conviction Mr. Khursheed Lone Pandat approached Hon'ble
Indraprastha High Court in an appeal from conviction. The matter has been listed for final
hearing before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Indraprastha.
18. Draft arguments from both the sides.
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________

Moot Problem No. 10

Ms. Nazneen aged 16 is a young and beautiful Muslim girl. She studies in 11th standard
having medical background. Being a laborious child since childhood she only concentrates in
her studies and she is not easily distracted by things happening around her. One fine day, the
school she was studying in, organized a science seminar and various eminent speakers were
invited. Mr. Rahul, a Hindu boy aged 28 years was also invited as a guest speaker because of
his extra ordinary achievements in the field of medical science. Ms. Nazneen, being one of
the students attended the seminar. Awestruck by Mr. Rahul’s amazing discourse and
professional communication skills and display of knowledge in the field of medical sciences.
Ms. Nazneen started considering him as her role model. Also, captivated by his charm and
personality, Ms. Nazneen in the wake of seeking guidance for further studies approaches Mr.
Rahul. She managed to secure his contact number through the pamphlets distributed during
the seminar. The very next day she calls him for guidance in the medical profession and also
complemented him for his extremely attractive personality and communication skills.
Surprised by her confidence in such an age, Mr. Rahul expressed his gratitude towards her
compliment and guided her efficiently for future endeavours in the medical profession. Soon
Ms. Nazneen started contacting Mr. Rahul frequently for one or the other reasons. The
relationship of guide and student soon turned into the relationship of friends followed by
meeting for coffee dates, going on long drives and sharing their secrets with each other and
this went on for two months. Suddenly, one day Ms. Nazneen confessed her feelings to Mr.
Rahul. Mr. Rahul who was also astonished by her beauty but was reluctant to take the first
step due to the age difference accepted her proposal happily. The friendship soon turned into
relationship. The fact of this relationship was no more a clandestine affair and Ms. Nazneen
parents started objecting to this. Ms. Nazneen with each passing day was getting determined
to marry Mr. Rahul who was equally supporting her in her decision to marry him. There were
several attempts by parents of Ms. Nazneen to make her understand about the adverse
consequences of this relationship and also warned her if she did not listen to them. However,
all they had to face was a debacle. Ms. Nazneen parents also threatened Mr. Rahul to stay
away from their daughter but all went in vain and one fine day Ms. Nazneen voluntarily
eloped with Mr. Rahul. Both of them directly went to the temple and solemnized their
marriage according to Hindu ceremony. Sensing the threat to their life from Ms. Nazneen’s
family, the couple sought legal advice. Their counsel Mr. Batra advised them to file a writ
petition under Article 226 read with Article 21 of the Indian Constitution in the judicature of
Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana. The case was listed, and the matter was called up
for hearing. Mr. Batra appearing for the petitioners argued before the Hon’ble High Court
seeking directions from the Hon’ble High Court to concerned Superintendent of Police as he
pleaded that if the relief is not granted the couple might become the victim of Honour Killing.
In his petition, Mr. Batra attached the photographs of their marriage that were taken during
their marriage ceremony in the temple. He further contended that Ms. Nazneen who was one
of the petitioners in the present case is a Muslim girl governed by Muslim Personal Law and
in Muslim Law, Puberty and Majority are one and the same thing and it is a presumption that
a person governed by Muslim Law attains majority at the age of 15 years since Ms. Nazneen
has crossed the age of puberty, she is free to marry any person of her choice and there cannot
be any sort of interference in her decision. Hence, they are validly married to each other and
are seeking protection. At the outset, the Court following the precedent in the case of Yunus
Khan v. State of Haryana opined the law is clear that the marriage of Muslim girl is governed
by the Muslim Personal Law, the Court further held that the danger to the life of the couple in
fact was real and being a constitutional Court addressed their apprehension and passed the
order issuing directions to the Superintendent of Police for the protection of their
fundamental right of their Life and Liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution but
without making any remarks regarding the validity of the marriage of the couple. The Court
further observed that merely because the petitioners have got married against the wishes of
their family members, they cannot possibly be deprived of fundamental rights as enshrined in
the Constitution, it being the grundnorm. The Court did grant the asked relief without
entering upon an exercise to evaluate the evidentiary value of the documents placed on
record. The Court also observed that this Order shall not be construed in the sense to not
initiate any action against petitioners, for violation of other laws, by them, if any. Alongside,
the Hon’ble High Court also granted the custody of Ms. Nazneen to Mr. Rahul. In pursuant to
this Order, the couple started living together. After six months, the couple started having
persistent arguments on one or the other things. These continuous arguments and this sore
relationship mentally drained Ms. Nazneen. Being frustrated with all this, Ms. Nazneen
decided to return to her parents who were any day happy to welcome her back alone. Mr.
Rahul made no attempts to bring Ms. Nazneen back which turned this marriage into a bogus
relationship. Convinced by her parents’ advice and realising her mistake, Ms. Nazneen
decided to end this marriage and thereby she along with her parents approached the police to
register an FIR against Mr. Rahul as she has now believed that Mr. Rahul took the benefit of
her adolescence. An FIR was registered under Sec 361 and Sec 503 IPC, Sec 3 and Sec 4 of
POCSO and Sec 9 & Sec 10 of Child Marriage Prohibition Act. Following this FIR, medical
examination of Ms. Nazneen was conducted at a Govt. Medical College and the doctor gave
his expert opinion that the possibility of attempted sexual intercourse cannot be ruled out. Mr.
Rahul came to know about all the proceedings that were being initiated against him through a
common friend and approached Mr. Batra again for his legal advice to protect him against the
penal consequences who in return, filed on his behalf an Anticipatory Bail Application which
was denied by the District and Session Court. Thereafter, he moved to the Hon’ble High
Court which allowed his Anticipatory Bail Application. Mr. Batra on behalf of Mr. Rahul
moved another Application under Sec 482 of CRPC for quashing of FIR which was
registered by the police on the instance of Ms. Nazneen against him, before the Hon’ble High
Court of Punjab & Haryana. The Counsel for the petitioner pleaded that it was in pursuance
of the Orders of this very Hon’ble High Court, that the estranged couple were living together
as husband and wife and he drew the attention of the Hon’ble High Court to the fact that it
was this Hon’ble Hight Court which granted the custody of the informant (Ms. Nazneen) to
Mr. Rahul. Submitting his final arguments, the Counsel of petitioner, Mr. Batra pleaded that
the FIR is liable to be quashed in the light of above Orders by this very Hon’ble Court. He
also questioned the charges that were levied against his client in the light of above Orders.
The Hon’ble High Court rejected the petition for quashing of FIR as it relied on the fact that
they had already in the above-mentioned Order made clear that the Order granting the
protection to petitioner was not meant to immune the petitioners from any legal action that
could be initiated against them for committing any offence under other statutes, if any.
Crestfallen and aggrieved by the decision, Mr. Rahul decided to challenge the Order of
Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India sensing the gravity of the present issue, in absence of any
particular legislation and also for framing the guidelines regarding the disposal of such cases
granted the petitioner a Special Leave to Petition under Article 136 of the Indian
Constitution. Notices were issued to the concerned parties i.e. State of Punjab and also the
Union of India. Argue from both sides.

Issues raised-
• Whether the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana was justified in granting protection
to the estranged couple under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution or not?
• Whether the Order granting the custody of the estranged wife to the petitioner immune him
from the subsequent offences, if any or not?
• Whether the FIR against Mr. Rahul is liable to be quashed or not?
• Whether the Hon’ble High Court under the shield of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
indirectly promoted Child Marriage and by passed any other special statutes?
• Whether in such cases the personal laws take over or is it the special statutes that takes the
lead?
_________________________x___________________x_____________________________