Itm Moot Court Respondent

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT TC-AJMC 006R
ARUN JAITLEY NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ACADEMIC YEAR 2023-2024
BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDONA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURIDICTION
In the matter of,

Section66C and 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000,
Sections354A, 354C, and 509 of THE INDONAN PENAL CODE, 1860
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. / 2023
(UNDER ARTICLE 134 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDONA)
IN THE MATTER OF :
RAVI ……APPELLANT
VS.
STATE OF MAHA PRADESH …….RESPONDENT
BEFORE SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT
OF INDONA
PAGE-1
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
LIST OF ABBREBIATIONS
ABBREBIATIONS EXPANSIONS
COI CONSTITUTION OF INDONA
ORS. OTHERS
SC SUPREME COURT
SCC SUPREME COURT CASES
V. VERSUS
HC HIGH COURT
PARA PARAGRAPH
H.R. HUMAN RIGHTS
U/S UNDER SECTION
U/A UNDER ARTICLE
HON’BLE HONORABLE
C.C CYBER CRIME
J.J JUVENILE JUSTICE
ART. ARTICLE
CONST. CONSTITUTION
IPC INDONAN PENAL CODE
CRPC CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

I.T. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
NCRB NATIONAL CRIME RECORDS

BUREAU
PAGE-2
S.L.P SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
C.P CRIMINAL PROCEEDING
R.I. RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT
& AND
REV. REVIEW
S. SECTION
SUPP. SUPPLEMENTARY
SS. SECTIONS
UOI UNION OF INDONA
LTD. LIMITED
U.P. UTTAR PRADESH
M.P. MADHYA PRADESH
W.B. WEST BENGAL
F.R. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
L.P LEGAL PROCEEDING
E.I EMOTIONAL IMPACT
L.J. LANDMARK JUDGEMENT
PAGE-3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBERIVATION..................................................................................................... 2
INDEX OF AUTHORITY .................................................................................................... 6
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..................................................................................... 9
STATEMENTS OF FACTS ............................................................................................... 10
ISSUE PRESENTED ......................................................................................................... 12
SUMMARY OF PLEADING............................................................................................... 13
ADVANCED ARGUMENTS ................................................................................................ 16
ISSUE 1:
WHETHER MR. RAVI CAN BE HELD LAIBLE FOR THE CYBER BULLYING AND
HARASSMENT ENDURED BY X?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………16
1.1 APPELANT’s LIABILITY FOR X TO ENDURE CYBERBULLYING &
HARASSEMENT
1.2 LAWS WHICH DEALS WITH CYBERCRIME
ISSUE 2:
WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRATS SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR HIM,
AND SHOULD HE BE REGARDED AS A JUVENILE OR AN ADULT IN THESE LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 19
ISSUE 3:
WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON MR. RAVI IS JUSTIFIED AND
LEGITIMATE?
………………………………………………………………………………………………….22
3.1 damage to X by Appellant.
3.2 The evidence against Accused credible proves the conduct beyond reasonable doubt.
3.3 What is an IP address?
PAGE-4
ISSUE 4:
WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BTO PRIVACY HAS BEEN

BRACHED
IN THE INVESTIGATION AS HIS SYSTEM WAS LOOKED IN TO WITHOUT HIS
PERMISSION AND KNOWLEDGE? WHETER THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE SET
ASIDE ON THE AFORESAID GROUND?
………………………………………………………………………………………………….25
4.1 Landmark judgement.
PRAYER….............................................................................................................. 29
PAGE-5
INDEX OF AUTHORITY
* STATUTESREFERRED:
(1) CONSTITUTION OF INDONA,1950
(2) INDONA PENALCODE,1860
(3) CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,1973
(4) THE LAW OF EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
(5) INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000
(6) JUVINILE JUSTICE ( CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2015
* BOOKSREFERRED:
(1) J.N. pandey constitution of Indona, 2022edition.
(2) Durga Das Basu Shorter Constitution of India BY Justice R Banumathi Vol.1-2, 16th
Edition, LexisNexis Publication
(3) Bare act of constitution of Indona, 2022edition.
(4) Constitution of indona by V.N. Shukla, 13th edition.
(5) Commentry on IPC by Rantanlal & Dheerajlal.
(6) S.N.MISRA, the code of criminal procedure,(25edition.2022)
(7) D.N. SEN, The code on criminal procedure (premier publishing company,
Allahabad,2021)
(8) Law of evidence by K.A. pandey. 18th edition.
(8) Principles of the law of evidence, by dr. avtar singh 24 th
edition.
(9) Bare act on law of evidence 1872, latest
edition.
(10) Commentary on the information technology act by J.N. BAROWALIA.
(11) Bare act on information technology act, latest
edition.
(12) Bare act on Juvenile justice act, 2015 (2023 edition)
(13) Commentary on the law of evidence by ratanlal and dhirajlal (27 th edition).
(14) Law of evidence by batuk lal (20th edition)
PAGE-6
* WEBSITESREFERRED:
• https://manupatra.com
• https://www.scribd.com
• https://www.scconline.com
• https://blog.ipleaderes.in
• https://ww.studyiq.com
• https://www.legalserviceIndona.com
• https://Indonankanoon.orghttps://timesofIndona.com
PAGE-7
LIST OF CASES
S.NO. CASES CITATION

1. state of Madhya Pradesh v. Bablu 2004
2. State of West Bengal v. Animesh Boxi (2018)
3. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011
4. Mohamood vs. state of up AIR 1976 SC 69
5. S. Gopala Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1996 SCC (4) 596
6. Mukesh and Anr vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. (2017) 6 SCC 1
7. Parag Bhati (Juvenile) through legal guardian v. State of (2016)

Uttar Pradesh
8. Ram Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar. 1980 SCR (1) 927

9. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Indona 1978 SC
597
10. Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of Indona 2016 7 SCC 761
12. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union 1981 SCR (2) 516
Territory of Delhi
13. Ram Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar 1980 SCR (1) 927
14. Kharak Singh v the State of U.P. AIR 1963 SC 1295
15. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of Indona, AIR 2017 SC 4161
16. Mr. X v. Hospital Z AIR 1999 SC 495
18. Deepti Kapur v. Kunal Julka. (2020)
19. Bennett Coleman and Co. vs. Union of Indona, 1973 SCR (2) 757
PAGE-8
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT
Statement of jurisdiction
The Appellant approached Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 134 of the constitution which pronounce as:
134. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in regard to criminal matters:
(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from judgement final order or sentence in a criminal
proceeding of a High Court in the territory of Indona if the High Court-
(a.) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death; or
(b.) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and has in such
trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death; or
(c.) 1[certifies under article 134A] that the case is a fit one for appeal to Supreme Court:
Provided that an appeal under sub-clause (c) Shall lie subject to such provisions as may be made in
that behalf under clause(1) of article 145 and to such conditions as the High Court may establish or
require.
(2) Parliament may by law confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to entertain and hear
appeals from any judgement, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court in the
territory of Indona subject to such condition and limitation as may be specified in such law.
PAGE-9
Statement of Facts
1. Initial Incident: That, on February 15, A 19 year old girl miss x received vile and
explicit images of through her social media accounts, leading her to emotional distress.
She inform about this incident to her parents. Her parents filed an FIR on the same day,
and Inspector Deepak Sharma initiated the investigation.
2. Investigation: Thus, Inspector Sharma interviewed X, for gathering details about the
explicit messages, and began looking into potential leads regarding the sender's identity.
And in her statement x stated “that she felt violated and humiliated. Those messages
shattered her self-esteem.”
X’s and Ravi’s Relation:
Good friends till last October, Ms. X and Mr. Ravi were considered as good
friends by their schoolmates and teachers alike. Having each other’s
back, they both were thriving in their education.
3. Witness Statements: Saaraa Patel(Witness 1), on February 18 saara patel, friend of X
mentioned a past heated argument between X and Ravi, which hinted at a possible motive.
Appellant firmly denied his involvement, claiming his social media accounts were
compromised in a phishing attack. On which K. Kartik (Witness 2) endorsed for Ravi. And
k kartik in his investigation mentioned that X and Ravi were good friends till 6 month ago
but there friendship become worsening after the said offer. X got an offer from of under
graduate studies from Standvard University situated abroad, Ravi had also applied to same
institution but did not get offer.
4. Parental Concern: X’s father expressed concerns about their daughter's well-being,
noting that she had received unsolicited texts before the incident.
5. School Involvement: On 24th february Inspector Sharma visited Hogwants High
School to gather information about X's and Ravi relationship. Dr. Mehta (Mental health
Councilor), mentioned that X and Ravi had booked counseling sessions after their quarrel,
Ravi was calm and decided to apply to other place for study abroad. Mr. Ravi according
to dr. Mehta was very mature for his age. He also added that ms. X was very bitter about
the quarrel.
6. Hacking and Privacy Breach: on 25th February, Ravi 's private details were obtained
without his consent, and a tech expert, Anni, identified hacking attempts on Ravi's social
media accounts She explains, "It appears that Ravi's accounts were compromised through
PAGE-10
7. a phishing attack. The hacker gained access to his personal information, allowing them to
send those messages”. AI-generated
Content was used to create malicious images, which then be distributed through appellants
account.
8. Legal Proceedings: The case was submitted to the local prosecutor's office,
recommending further legal action. However, Ravi claimed that his privacy was breached
when his system was accessed for evidence.
9. Juvenile or Adult Status: That, Appellant, aged 17 years, which raises a question of
whether he should be treated as a juvenile or an adult in the legal proceedings. The lower
courts and the high court of maha Pradesh denied treating him as a juvenile, considering
his understanding of the consequences.
10. Subsequent Appeals: The Appellant filled petition to the Supreme Court of Indona
after the Subordinate and High Courts convicted Appellant under sections 354A, 354C,
354D, 509 of the IPC and section 66C & 66E IT Act, imposing a 10-year sentence for
rigorous imprisonment.
11. Implications: The case has drawn significant public and legal attention, as it addresses
issues related to cyberbullying, juvenile justice, and digital privacy. It has the potential to
set precedents for future cases.
PAGE-11
ISSUES PRESENTED
ISSUE 1:
1. WHETHER MR. RAVI CAN BE HELD LAIBLE FOR THE
CYBER BULLYING AND HARASSMENT ENDURED BY X?
ISSUE 2:
2. WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRATS SPECIAL

CONSIDERATION FOR HIM, AND SHOULD HE BE
REGARDED AS A JUVENILE OR AN ADULT IN THESELEGAL
PROCEEDINGS?
ISSUE 3:
3. WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON MR. RAVI IS
JUSTIFIED AND LEGITIMATE?
ISSUE 4:
4. WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BTO

PRIVACY HAS BEEN BRACHED IN THE INVESTIGATION AS
HIS SYSTEM WAS LOOKED IN TO WITHOUT HIS
PERMISSION AND KNOWLEDGE? WHETER THE
INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE SET ASIDE ON THE
AFORESAID GROUND?
PAGE-12
SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS
ISSUE 1:
WHETHER MR. RAVI CAN BE HELD LAIBLE FOR THE CYBER BULLYING AND HARASSMENT
ENDURED BY X?
it is humbly submitted before Supreme court of Indona that Appellant is liable for the cyber
bullying and harassment endured by X, because under investigation by investigating officer by
tracking internet protocol (IP) address of computer system from which explicit images came
through which they found that the device belonged to Appellant.
Cyber bullying consider as a heinous crime under Indonan penal code and information
technology act, it not only distress a person but also affect dignity and self-esteem.
ISSUE- 2
WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRANTS SPECIAL CONSIDERATION FOR HIM,
AND SHOULD HE BE REGARDED AS A JUVENILE OR AN ADULT IN THESE LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS?
It is humbly requested to honorable Supreme Court of Indona that Appellant should not be
regarded as a juvenile in legal proceeding and also, Appellant is consider as a adult by
subordinate court and honorable high court and confirmed the cyberbullying as a heinous
offence.
The conviction of a criminal is an important principle of the criminal justice system. This means
that every criminal must be punished for the crime committed.
Because of committing heinous offence under section 354A, 354C, 354D, 509 and section 66C
and 66E, of the IT act.
Cyber Bullying can be defined as the intentional infliction of physical or physiological pain and
harm on a person, usually students or women who fall victim to this vice.
PAGE-13
Cyberbullying victim tales on the cyberbullying research Centre is that cyberbullying is
extremely destructive because it pushes a person towards anxiety, sadness, depression etc. All
these factors have a bad impact on the victim`s mental health. Cyber bullying us an intentional
act which is done even after knowing consequences of the act. Hence Appellant should not be
consider as a juvenile in this case.
ISSUE - 3
WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON MR. RAVI IS JUSTIFIED AND LEGITIMATE?
It is humbly submitted before Supreme Court of indona that the penalty imposed on
Appellant is totally justified and legitimate because the crime commited by Appellant
is not an oridinary crime, so it is truly justified that he got 10 year imprisonment.
Cyber bullying destroy a person from inside and make depressed and push in to a dark
phases here in this case by sending explicit image of X cause a very deep impact on her
life and also by sending those images, Ravi violate her fundamental right to live with
dignity.
Cyberbullying is a serious offense because it can have a lasting impact on the victim's
mental and emotional health. Victims of cyberbullying are more likely to experience
depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. They may also have difficulty concentrating
in school and forming relationships.
Hence the imprisonment imposed on Ravi is clearly justified and legitimate.
ISSUE - 4
WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BTO PRIVACY HAS BEEN
BRACHED IN THE INVESTIGATION AS HIS SYSTEM WAS LOOKED IN TO
WITHOUT HIS PERMISSION AND KNOWLEDGE? WHETER THE
INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE SET ASIDE ON THE AFORESAID GROUND?
It is humbly submitted before supreme court of indona that right to privacy is not
connect to everything and everything should not be come under violation of
fundamental right to privacy because if even investigation against accused come under
right to privacy and also if examining data for police investigation came under right to
privacy than it will be too difficult to proof a person guilty for certain case.
PAGE-14
So, that right to privacy does not mean right to protection from investigation and a
person should not be protect from investigation. Also it should not be used as a shield
for accused because it only the way by which police can find a guilty mind so, here in
this case police investigate his social media account without his knowledge should not
be consider as violation of right to privacy because by this way police protect the
information from manipulate by accused.
Also here police use examining data without the consent of Appellant because police
protect data from manipulating.
PAGE-15
ARGUMENT ADVANCED
ISSUE 1:
1. WHETHER MR. RAVI CAN BE HELD LAIBLE FOR THE CYBER
BULLYING AND HARASSMENT ENDURED BY X?
1.1 It is humbly submitted before supreme court of Indona that the petitioner is liable for the cyber
bullying and harassment endured by x, eye witness no. 1, 2 and 3 under investigation mention
that the petitioner is short temper according to nature and Saara patel friend of X mention in
her witness about the heated argument between both of them and also suggesting possible
motive.
Cyberbullying is bullying that harms the victim through electronic means, including social
media, in cludes hate speech, public disclosure of personal information, and emotions and
feelings that causes tress. This will involve sending and publishing offensive messages or
images to the victim via social media and other digital communication tools.
Cyberbullying is harassment done to the victim to cause harm via any electronic method,
including social media resulting in defamation, public disclosure of private facts, and
intentional emotional distress. It can be related to sending and posting cruel texts or images
with the help of social media and other digital communication devices to harm a victim. In the
past decade, Cyberbullying has been an emerging phenomenon that has a sociopsychological
impact on adolescents.
1
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bablu (2004)
The High Court of Maha Pradesh in instant reduced the sentence of the accused since he was a
first offender. The Supreme Court, however, held that such a reduction would encourage the
accused to repeat the crime which would be detrimental to the morals of society.
1.2 LAWS WHICH DEALS WITH CYBER CRIME:
Section 66 C of the 2Information Technology Act, 2000

This provision deals with the punishment for using an electronic signature, password, or any
other identification feature of any other person dishonestly or fraudulently. A person is
1
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bablu AIR (2004)
2
information technology act,2000
PAGE-16
punishable under this provision up to 3 years of imprisonment or a fine up to one lakh rupees
for identity theft.
Section 66 E of the Information Technology Act, 2000

This provision was added in the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. This provision
provides protection to both men and women. This provision specifically deals with privacy with
respect to one’s body parts. It is punishable to capture (any video, image, film, or record through
any means) publish,(that is available to the public) or to transmit an image film, or video recorded
that has been sent in such a way that it can be viewed by person or persons without the consent of
the person, violating his or her privacy. This section covers two circumstances that would amount
to a violation of the privacy of that person.
Section 354 C of the 3Indonan Penal Code, 1860
This section deals with voyeurism. Under this provision, any man who captures the image or
watches any woman engaged in some private act in such circumstances where she presumes
privacy or spreads such images to a third party would be considered an offense. This provision
is gender specific, i.e.it only covers males. Females are not punished under this provision. On
first conviction, he shall be punished with imprisonment which should not be less than 1 year
and this may extend to 3 years with a fine. This imprisonment increases on a second conviction
of at least 3 years which may extend to 7 years with a fine.
Section 354 D defines stalking as:
When a man follows a woman and contacts her, or tries- to contact her to stimulate personal
interaction frequently even when she shows a clear intention of disinterest.
1. Monitors the activity of the woman online through various communication methods like
email, messaging apps.
This section only covers women. Any stalking of males is not covered under Section 354 D. In
the case of the 4State of West Bengal v. Animesh Boxi (2018), the accused hacked the victim’s
phone and took control of some of her private pictures. He blackmailed her by threatening to
post those pictures on a pornography website. Here the court held that the victim has suffered
from virtual rape. Thus the accused will be convicted under Section 354 D of IPC.
3
Indonan penal code, 1860
4
State of West Bengal v. Animesh Boxi (2018)
PAGE-17
Section 509 of the Indonan Penal Code, 1860
If a person does any act or utters any word or makes such gestures or sounds with the
intention to intrude on the privacy and to offend the modesty of women, he shall be punished
with simple imprisonment which may extend to three years with a fine. The intention is the
most important essential of the section. If any person tries to harass a woman through electronic
mode or by using any telecommunication device shall be punished with fine and rigorous
imprisonment which shall not be less than two months however this rigorous imprisonment
may extend to 2 years also.
The Supreme Court has in 5Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan AIR1997 held that an offence
relating to the modesty of a woman cannot be considered trivial. And here in this case modesty
of women was clearly destroyed.
And it is humbly submitted before supreme court of indona that the expert opinion should not
be reliable , expert evidence is only a piece of evidence and weight to be given to it has to be
judged along with other evidence of this nature is ordinarily not conclusive. Such evidence
therefore cannot be taken as substantial piece of evidence unless corroborated by other
evidence. The opinion of expert are not binding upon judge. It always based on the discretion
of Hon’ble court. In the landmark judgement of Supreme Court 6Mohamood vs. State of U.P.,
it would be highly unsafe to convict a person on the sole of testimony of expert.
In the landmark judgement of 7s. Gopala Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh The Supreme Court
held that an expert evidence is a weak type of evidence. Court do not consider as conclusive and
therefore it is not safe to rely upon it without seeking independent and reliable corroboration.
Hence, it humbly asserted that Ravi’s intentions toward X were malicious, he eroded for their
relationship which led to Cyberbullying consider as a heinous crime under Indonan penal code and
information technology act, it not only distress a person but also affect dignity and self-esteem.
5
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011
6
Mohamood vs. State of U.P., AIR 1976 SC 69
7
S. Gopala Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1996 SCC (4) 596
PAGE-18
ISSUE -2
2. WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRANTS SPECIAL CONSIDERATION

FOR HIM, AND SHOULD HE BE REGARDED AS A JUVENILE OR AN
ADULT IN THESE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS?
It is humbly submitted before Supreme Court of Indona that the Appellant should be treats as
an adult in this present case.
In the given case Appellant violated several laws defined under IPC and IT act by harassing
prosecutrix by sending explicit images to her social media account which makes her mentally
ill and make her emotionally scarred.
Bullying can be defined as the intentional infliction of physical or physiological pain and harm
on a person, usually students or women who fall victim to this vice.
And when bullying is carried out using electronic devices or means such as mobile phones,
computers, tablets and other online platforms etc then it is referred as cyber bullying and this
practice of bullying is much prevalent in the present day society. Cyberbullying victim tales on
the cyberbullying research Centre is that cyberbullying is extremely destructive because it
pushes a person towards anxiety, sadness, depression etc.
It includes sending, uploading or spreading unpleasant, disparaging, false or hurtful content
about another person.
Appellant is 17 year old and did this heinous crime intentionally and it is humbly submitted
that “subordinate court and Hon’ble high court of Maha Pradesh convicted Appellant
as an adult and asserted that Appellant was well known about the consequences of the
act done by him”.
According to Section 15 of The 8 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
(Juvenile justice Act, 2015), juveniles charged with heinous crimes and who are between 16 to 18
years can be tried as an adults.
Appellant was student in a well reputed school in whole state which is Hogwants high school
known for its education and also Appellant is mature according to witness no.2 Dr. Mehta
(mental health councilor of Hogwants high school).
8 10
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 NCRB
DATA.
PAGE-19
So, here he is well educated and mature according to his that it clearly states that he is well known about the
consequences of the crime which he had committed.
It was contended in the case of 9Mukesh &Anr vs Union of Indona & Ors. AIR 2017,
also known as the Nirbhaya rape case, that the accused’s age should not be used as a shield
for the level of cruelty he perpetrated on the victim. It was observed that he physically
abused the woman with a metal bar, causing her pain and lacerations on her body. In the
last sentence, the young man was released after serving his prison sentence by court
decision.
9
Parag Bhati (Juvenile) through legal guardian v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2016)
The Respondent in this case was arrested for murder and imprisoned in a juvenile home. His father
filed a juvenile regarding his age, claiming that he was a child. This was also supported by various
school certificates. However, the Juvenile Justice Board, after scrutinizing the certificates, had
some doubts regarding his juvenility, and the accused was referred to the medical board for
examination and determining his age. The medical board opined that he was a major, and so his
case was transferred to the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The Supreme Court, on the issue of determination of juvenility, held that the principle of
juvenile under the Act would be applicable only in cases where the accused is prima facie a
minor. The present case deals with a well-planned serious offence that depicts the maturity of
the accused, and he is not innocent. The plea of juvenility in this case was held to be of a nature
to dodge the law in place.
10
The Supreme Court ruled in Ram Prasad Sahu V. State of Bihar AIR 1979, that a minor
criminal can be convicted of both rapes and attempted rape. If a youngster is not eligible for
punishment but is capable of committing rape or murder, granting him blanket immunity violates
the principles of fairness and proportionality of punishment.
2.1 International convention USA:
In the US, anyone 13 years old and above can be tried as an adult if he or she has a record of
previously breaking the law or commits a serious crime. Children between the changes of 15-16
9
Parag Bhati (Juvenile) through legal guardian v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2016)
PAGE-20
are tried as adults for certain offenses, including murder, aggravated criminal sexual assault, and
armed robbery with a firearm.
Hence, it is humbly submitted before Hon’ble Supreme court of Indiona that appellant should not
be regarded as a juvenile in legal proceedings. And the sanction confirmed against accused shall
be treated as a accused person and rectify Ravi as an offender. Since he could also pose great
danger too.
PAGE-21
ISSUE -3
3 WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON RAVI IS JUSTIFIED AND

LEGITIMATE?
It is humbly prayed to Hon’ble Supreme court of indona that the penalty asserted on
Appellant is reasonable and justified to uphold true vindicate to the matter. Thus Penal
Sanctions imposed over Appellant were on section 354A, 354C, 354D, 509 of the IPC
and section 66C & 66E IT Act,
Cyber bullying consider as a heinous offence so, it is important to hold juveniles
accountable for their actions and to protect society from harm. In some cases, a 10-year
prison sentence may be necessary to achieve these goals. An explanation of this, If a
juvenile has committed a violent crime, such as murder, rape etc, they may pose a serious
threat to public safety. In such cases, a lengthy prison sentence may be the only way to
ensure that the juvenile is unable to harm anyone else.
Cyberbullying is a serious and harmful behavior that involves using digital communication
tools, such as social media, text messages, or email, to harass, threaten, or harm others. As Per
the Principles Enshrined under UN Instruments for Right of victim of Crime
It observes relevant judicial dicta that have sought to address the needs of victim of crime. The
victim of the crime is the person who initiates the criminal justice system by informing the
police about the crime.
The Sanction imposed on against the offender addresses to the need of victim to be treated
with dignity, protection from intimidation. To readily access the justice procedure to legal aid
and rehabilitation.
3.1 DAMAGE TO X BY ACCUSED
1. Psychological and Emotional Impact: As stated by X in her statement to investigator

that Ravi’s action caused her to lose of her self-esteem to break which left prosecutrix
to severe psychological and emotional impact whose consequences for the victims,
including depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and even suicidal thoughts. Since
Appellant is still an teenager she particular, she is more vulnerable to its effects of
Cyberbullying
PAGE-22
2. Educational Impact: Cyberbullying disrupted X's education, As it causing her to miss
school, experience a decline in academic performance, and even leading to thoughts for
change in school or learning environment.
3. Social Isolation: X has been withdrawn from social activities and relationships, leading
her to social isolation and further emotional distress.
3.2 The evidence against Accused credible proves the conduct beyond reasonable
doubt.
The High Court has correctly interpreted and applied the relevant provisions of IPC
and IT Act that deal with cyberbullying and harassment. Court has relied on
sufficient and reliable evidence to convict the Ravi as the Offender and to determine
quantum of the sanction.
Accused, had an intention to derogate the reputation of Prosecutrix stopped talking with
Ravi since after that accused perpetrated entire scenario where he stated his account was
hacked, and his system was compromised in pushing attack.
3.3 What is an IP address.
As, it was accused system was tracked down while tracing the IP address of system. Since,
when tracking down IP address Procedure goes as following:
That, IP addresses are unique identifiers that allow different machines and networks to
communicate and exchange information.
In the past one year. Adolescents who experienced cyberbullying victimization were 2.07 times
more likely to have depressive symptoms compared to those who did not experience
cyberbullying victimization.
3.4 Violation of fundamental right to live with dignity:
The right to live with human dignity is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed under
Article 21 In the Indonan Constitution. It means that every person has the inalienable right
to live with dignified life without discrimination. They are entitled to claim equal respect
from the state as well as from other persons.
PAGE-23
14
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Indona, the Supreme Court gave a new dimension to
Art. 21. The Court held that the right to live is not merely a physical right, but includes
within its ambit the right to live with human dignity.
15
Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of Indona: In this case, the Supreme Court of Indona held
that the right to dignity includes the right to be treated with respect and the right to live
a life free from discrimination and harassment.
16
Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi: In this case, the
Supreme Court of Indona held that the right to life embodied in Article 21 of the
Indonan Constitution is not merely a physical right but includes within its ambit the
right to live with human dignity.
17
The Supreme Court ruled in Ram Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar (1979), that a minor
criminal can be convicted of both rapes and attempted rape. If a youngster is not eligible for
punishment but is capable of committing rape or murder, granting him blanket immunity
violates the principles of fairness and proportionality of punishment.
Hence in this case the right to live with dignity in society violated by the Appellant which
causes multiple effect on X so, the penalty imposed on Appellant are justified.
______________________________
14
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Indona 1978 SC 597
15
Jeeja Ghosh v. Union of Indona 2016 7 SCC 761
16
Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi 1981 SCR (2) 516
17
Ram Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar 1980 SCR (1) 927
PAGE-24
ISSUE -4
4. WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY HAS

BEEN BRACHED IN THE INVESTIGATION AS HIS SYSTEM WAS
LOOKED IN TO WITHOUT HIS PERMISSION AND KNOWLEDGE?
WHETER THE INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE SET ASIDE ON THE
AFORESAID GROUND?
4.1 It is humbly submitted before Supreme Court of Indona that right to privacy should not be
use as a shield for accused because if even investigation against accused come under right
to privacy and also if examining data for police investigation came under right to privacy
than it will be too difficult to proof a person guilty for certain case.
So, that right to privacy does not mean right to protection from investigation and a person
should not be protect from investigation. here in this case police investigate his social
media account without his knowledge should not be consider as violation of right to
privacy because by this way police protect the information from manipulate by accused.
Manipulation of facts will be easy for the accused if police take consent from accused to
access his data.
4.2 Landmark judgement:
The right to privacy is not formally advocated as a fundamental right in the Constitution.
The right to privacy came into light in 10Kharak Singh v the State of U.P (1963) where
the main issue was pertaining to surveillance of suspects.
This judgement of kharak signh case has been overruled by Supreme Court itself in case of
puttaswamy, and put some restriction on right to privacy.
11
In the year 2017, the Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Justice K.S.
Puttaswamy Vs Union of Indona, also known as the Aadhar case. It was in this case that
the Right to privacy was first recognized as a fundamental right given under the constitution
of Indona. The court held that the right to privacy is an integral part of the right to life and
10
Kharak Singh v the State of U.P., AIR 1963 SC 1295
11
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy Vs Union of Indona, AIR 2017
PAGE-25
Personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Due to this judgment,
the Supreme Court interpreted that Aadhar is not violative of right to privacy and this
judgment overruled the above other judgments where it was said that right to privacy is not
a fundamental right.
Right to privacy has now be granted the status of fundamental right but is not an absolute
right overall and is subject to certain restrictions or limitations that are:
1. National Security and Public Safety.
2. Public Interest.
3. Scientific or Historic Research.
4. Criminal Offences, etc.
According to K.S. Puttaswamy case, right to privacy is not absolute right and in case of
criminal offence this right can be abridge to find a guilty mind or accused. In this present
case Appellant’s right to privacy has been abridge to know about his social media status is
totally justified and legal because nature of this case is criminal and such action taken by
respondent to proof Appellant is guilty and also according to K.S. Puttaswamy case if
public interest involve than violation of privacy should not be consider and here also in this
case public interest indirectly involve as there have lot of case filed against cyber bullying,
and to identify the guilty one, police use to access the data of suspect some time with
consent and sometime without consent, and police do so, to find the accused and to solve
the immediately because sometime time if police take consent of suspect than it was seems
many time that suspect manipulate the data.
The constitution of indona provides reasonable restriction to the right to privacy in

“interest of the sovereignty and integrity of indona, the security of the state, public order,
decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an
offence.
Furthermore, other fundamental rights may be moe authoritative than the right to privacy
in certain situation which creates a limitation on the same.
PAGE-26
11
In Mr. X v. Hospital Z (1998), it was laid down that if there is a conflict between
two fundamental rights including the right to privacy then the right that furthers
public morality or public interest would be enforced.
College in Mukkam, Kerala, committed suicide by jumping due to being cyberbullied over a
Facebook post and injured her spine, legs, and head. One more incident was reported
on 9 January 2018 where a 20 years old Hindu woman killed herself after facing
harassment on WhatsApp over her friendship with a Muslim man in Karnataka. Many
such cases are reported every year, and this rising number of suicides due to
cyberbullying is alarming and worrisome. And in several cases it was seem that
suspect manipulate or use to destroy evidence against them so, police use to access
the suspect data without his/her knowledge.
The primary cause is online inhibition, in which a person bullies others with the motives
of harm, domination, revenge, or entertainment. And according to fact of this case it is clear
That Appellant have intent to harm X.
In some jurisdictions, the police might have the authority to search a mobile phone
without a warrant if it's considered incidental to a lawful arrest. This could include
ensuring officer safety or preventing the destruction of evidence. However, the extent of
this authority might be subject to legal debate and interpretation.
In the case of 12Deepti Kapur v. Kunal Julka CM(M) 40/2019, Justice Anup Jairam
Bhambhani laid down,
“Since no fundamental right under our Constitution is absolute, in the event of conflict
between two fundamental rights, as in this case, a contest between the right to privacy and
the right to fair trial, both of which arise under the expansive Article 21, the right to privacy
may have to yield to the right to fair trial.” Although today, privacy is recognized as a
fundamental right, that alone would not make evidence collected in breach of that right,
inadmissible.” The settled rule, purely from the standpoint of the law of evidence, is that
evidence is admissible so long as it is relevant, regardless of how it is collected.
Looking at it dispassionately, even assuming evidence is collected in breach of privacy, at
best and at worst, it is the process of collection of evidence that would be tainted not the
evidence itself.”
11
Mr. X v. Hospital Z AIR 1999 SC 495
12
Deepti Kapur v. Kunal Julka., (2020)
PAGE-27
Right to fair trial also consider as a fundamental right under 21 article of constitution and
according to this recent case it was clearly mention first priority given to right to fair trail
and to Provide fair trial respondent access Appellant’s data without his consent because
there were number of cases related to destruction of evidence.
He development of the right to information can also be seen through various Supreme
Court judgements also, as in the case of 13 Bennett Coleman and Co. vs. Union of
Indona, the right to information was held to be included within the right to freedom of
speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).
So, that right to privacy does not mean right to protection from investigation and a person
should not be protect from investigation. Also it should not be used as a shield for accused
because it only the way by which police can find a guilty mind so, here in this case police
investigate his social media account without his knowledge should not be consider as
violation of right to privacy because by this way police protect the information from
manipulate by accused.
Also here police use examining data without the consent of Appellant because police protect
data from manipulating.
13
Bennett Coleman and Co. vs. Union of Indona, 1973 SCR (2) 757
PAGE-28
Prayer
It is, therefore, most humbly prayed before this Hon’ble Apex Court to kindly dismiss this
vexatious Criminal Appeal filed by Appellant and may be pleased to adjudge and declare that:
1. These contentions raised by appellant are misconceived and farfetched contentions

which are bereft of any merit
2. And uphold the decision of the High Court which has decided the case on merits.
And /pass such other order in light of justice, equity and good conscience which this Hon’ble
Apex court may feel fit and in proper circumstance of the case
Place: Mombeshwar THE HUMBLY

Date: 25/11/23 RESPONDENT
THOUGH COUNSEL
PAGE-29

Itm Moot Court Respondent

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Itm Moot Court Respondent

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT TC-AJMC 006R

ARUN JAITLEY NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDONA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURIDICTION

In the matter of,

Sections354A, 354C, and 509 of THE INDONAN PENAL CODE, 1860

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. / 2023

(UNDER ARTICLE 134 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDONA)

STATE OF MAHA PRADESH …….RESPONDENT

BEFORE SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

COI CONSTITUTION OF INDONA

SCC SUPREME COURT CASES

H.R. HUMAN RIGHTS

U/S UNDER SECTION

U/A UNDER ARTICLE

C.C CYBER CRIME

J.J JUVENILE JUSTICE

IPC INDONAN PENAL CODE

CRPC CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

NCRB NATIONAL CRIME RECORDS

C.P CRIMINAL PROCEEDING

R.I. RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT

UOI UNION OF INDONA

U.P. UTTAR PRADESH

M.P. MADHYA PRADESH

W.B. WEST BENGAL

F.R. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

L.P LEGAL PROCEEDING

E.I EMOTIONAL IMPACT

L.J. LANDMARK JUDGEMENT

INDEX OF AUTHORITY .................................................................................................... 6

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..................................................................................... 9

STATEMENTS OF FACTS ............................................................................................... 10

ISSUE PRESENTED ......................................................................................................... 12

ADVANCED ARGUMENTS ................................................................................................ 16

3.3 What is an IP address?

WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BTO PRIVACY HAS BEEN

4.1 Landmark judgement.

S.NO. CASES CITATION

2. State of West Bengal v. Animesh Boxi (2018)

3. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011

4. Mohamood vs. state of up AIR 1976 SC 69

5. S. Gopala Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1996 SCC (4) 596

7. Parag Bhati (Juvenile) through legal guardian v. State of (2016)

8. Ram Prasad Sahu v. State of Bihar. 1980 SCR (1) 927

14. Kharak Singh v the State of U.P. AIR 1963 SC 1295

16. Mr. X v. Hospital Z AIR 1999 SC 495

18. Deepti Kapur v. Kunal Julka. (2020)

1. WHETHER MR. RAVI CAN BE HELD LAIBLE FOR THE

CYBER BULLYING AND HARASSMENT ENDURED BY X?

2. WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRATS SPECIAL

3. WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON MR. RAVI IS

JUSTIFIED AND LEGITIMATE?

4. WHETHER THE RAVI’S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BTO

1.2 LAWS WHICH DEALS WITH CYBER CRIME:

Section 66 C of the 2Information Technology Act, 2000

Section 66 E of the Information Technology Act, 2000

Section 509 of the Indonan Penal Code, 1860

2. WHETHER THE AGE OF RAVI WARRANTS SPECIAL CONSIDERATION

2.1 International convention USA:

3 WHETHER THE PENALTY IMPOSED ON RAVI IS JUSTIFIED AND

3.1 DAMAGE TO X BY ACCUSED

1. Psychological and Emotional Impact: As stated by X in her statement to investigator