Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3Rd moot
Date: 20/6/2023
Time: 11:30
IN THE MATTERS OF
Mooters
Appellant side
1. Parvathy S Pillai
2. Muhammed Ansar kp
3. Radha Krishnan TR
Respondent side
1. Monisha Babu
2. Pooja P Madhu
3. Muhammed Riyasudheen kp
Student judges
1. Safa
2. Rinees . J
Presiding judges
1. Adv.Reema maliyekkal
2. Adv. saritha
STATEMENT OF FACTS
and his aunt Sarli at about 5pm. On the same day the others started pelting bricks and
stones up un the house of the Sudhir Kumar showing solidarity with Sarli. However,
the Sudhir Kumar and other family members remind inside their house out of fear.
2. On the next day 14-03-2008 Sudhir Kumar’s mother Ramrathi went to fetch water at
about 2pm and at that time 8 persons were sitting there and they started threatening
Ramrathi with dire consequences. Subsequently 9 persons carrying deadly weapons like
Jellies and iron rods approached the shop of the Sudhir Kumar’s brother, Satheesh and
threatened him also. Consequently Sathish fled from the scene. There after all the
persons came to the house of the Sudhir Kumar and attacked his father, Balwansingh.
The Sudhir Kumar and his cousin were also injured in this altercation.
3. The regional police station filed FIR charged section 302,148,323,506, read with 149
IPC.
4. The trail court convicted Surendar @ Monu (respondent no.2) Son of Vedprakash
(respondent no 3) for the offences he was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
for the offences punishable under section 302 IPC and pay a fine of Rs. 10000 to
5. All other were convicted by the trail court for the offences punishable under section
323, 506,148 read with 149 IPC. They were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 6
6. The High Court reduced Surendar @ Monu (respondent no.2) for the offence
punishable under section 302 IPC to section 304 IPC and other accused sentences to
Issues
1. Whether The Petition Is mainatainable?
2. Whether The Act Of Accused Amounts to Murder?
3. Whether All The Other Accused Are avail to get any beneficiary
provisions under law
Judgement
The court set aside the High Court’s judgment and convicted Surender
(Monu) under Section 302 IPC, sentencing him to life imprisonment and
imposing a fine. The fine amount, if paid, would be given to the legal
representatives of the deceased as compensation. If the fine is not paid,
Surender (Monu) would serve an additional three years of rigorous
imprisonment.