MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF XYZ

Crl. Appeal No.___/2023

IN THE MATTER OF

PRIYA......................................................................................................................APPELLANT

Versus

STATE OF XYZ………...………………….........................................................RESPONDENT

UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973

R/W SECTION 368 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973

Most Respectfully Submitted in the Registry of the Hon’ble High Court of XYZ

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 4
STATUTES: 4
FOREIGN STATUTES: 4
BOOKS: 4
CASES: 5
FOREIGN CASES: 8
COMMITTEE REPORTS: 8
LEGAL DATABASES: 8
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 9
STATEMENT OF FACTS 10
STATEMENT OF ISSUES 11
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 12
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED 15
ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT OF
VALLUVARNADU, AFTER THOROUGHLY CONSIDERING THE DOCTRINE OF RAREST
OF RARE CASES, RIGHTFULLY SENTENCED THE APPELLANT TO DEATH?
15
1.1 There exist multiple mitigating factors. 15
1.2 The offence was committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional
disturbance. 16
1.3 The appellant has two minor children in need of her motherly care and affection. 16
1.4 The appellant has not played a direct role in the perpetration of the crime. 16
1.5 India promotes the Reformative Theory of Punishment. 17
1.6 There are several legal precedents substantiating the Reformative Theory. 17
ISSUE 2: WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A GROSS VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE,
INCLUDING ITS PRINCIPLES AND OTHER RELEVANT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
VESTED WITH THE APPELLANT? 17
2.1 There has been no thorough procedure of investigation. 18
2.2 The Judiciary may have acted hastily and with bias in this case. 18
2.3 The judiciary is conforming to the majoritarian view propagated by the media. 19
2.4 The remission of the appellant’s father and brother was unlawful,thereby substantiating
their influence over the governmental bodies. 19

2
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

2.5 The appellant’s father and brother do not come under the exceptions to special
remission. 19
2.6 The Hon’ble Court possesses the power to reappraise evidence of the Hon’ble Principal
Sessions Court. 19
2.7 The appellant is vested with the right to file a mercy petition. 20
PRAYER 21

3
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And
% Percentage
¶ Paragraph
A.I.R All India Reporter
Bom. Bombay
CA Calcutta
Cri. Criminal
Dr. Doctor
Del Delhi
Edn Edition
Govt. Government
HC High Court
Hon’ble Honourable
Ibid Same as immediately above
ILR Indian Law Review
J. Justice
MP Member of the Parliament
Mad Madras
MANU Manupatra
MH Maharashtra
No. Number
PIL Public Interest Litigation
Pvt. Ltd. Private Limited
Pg. Page
Ors. Others
Raj Rajasthan
Rep. Represented
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SC Supreme Court
Supra Mentioned before
Suppl. Supplementary
UOI Union of India
U.P Uttar Pradesh
u/ Under

4
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES:

1. Constitution of India, 1950

2. Indian Penal Code, 1860
3. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
4. Indian Evidence Act,1872
5. Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

FOREIGN STATUTES:
1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1976
2. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

BOOKS:

1. Dr. D.D. Basu, Commentary on Constitution of India, (8th Ed., Lexis Nexis, 2010).
2. Dr. J. N. Pandey, The Constitution Law of India, (52nd ed. 2016)
3. KD Gaur, The Indian Penal Code, (15th Ed., Law Publishers India Pvt. Ltd.,2016)
4. MP Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, ( 7th Ed., Lexis Nexis, 2016)
5. Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, (33rd Ed., Lexis Nexis, 2016)

CASES:

1. Bachan Singh vs State Of Punjab, (1982) 3 SCC 24

2. Manoj Suryavanshi vs State Of Chhatisgarh, SLP (Crl.) No. 8682 of 2014]
3. Govind Pasi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1004 of 2018
4. Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No.
1478 Of 2005
5. Mofil Khan v. State of Jharkhand, Criminal Appeal No. 1795 of 2009
6. Gulab Singh v. Yuvraj Singh, 1995 Supp (4) SCC 62
7. Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1977 AIR 1926
8. Kannan v. State of Tamil Nadu, , 1982 2 SCC 350

5
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

9. State of Rajasthan v Komal Lodha 2022 SCC Online SC 1832

10. Shabnam vs Union Of India And Anr - Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 88 of 2015

LEGAL DATABASES:

1. Indian Kanoon
2. SCC Online
3. Manupatra

6
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The appellant has filed the present Criminal Appeal Petition before this Hon’ble High Court of
XYZ, humbly requesting the Hon’ble Court to commute the death sentence granted to the
appellant by the Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court of Valluvarnadu.
The Hon’ble High Court has the jurisdiction to hear the matter under Section 374(2) r/w Section
368 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Cr.P.C. - SECTION 374 - APPEALS FROM CONVICTIONS

(2) Any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions
Judge or on a trial held by any other court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more
than seven years has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at
the same trial], may appeal to the High Court.

Cr.P.C - SECTION 368 - POWER OF HIGH COURT TO CONFIRM SENTENCE OR

ANNUL CONVICTION

In any case submitted under section 368, the High Court—

(a) may confirm the sentence, or pass any other sentence warranted by law, or
(b) may annul the conviction, and convict the accused of any offence of which the Court
of Session might have convicted him, or order a new trial on the same or an amended
charge, or
(c) may acquit the accused person:

Provided that no order of confirmation shall be made under this section until the period allowed
for preferring an appeal has expired, or, if an appeal is presented within such period, until such
appeal is disposed of.

7
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Aryavarta, a country with a high population density, is celebrated for its diverse array of
religions and ethnic groups. Its constitution provides assurances of justice, equality, and
liberty to all citizens, while simultaneously promoting a sense of fraternity. The nation
boasts a robust executive, with a firm stance on human rights violations, prioritising the
principles of natural justice that prohibit unfair punishment.
2. Rajesh and Priya, two individuals from different castes, fell deeply in love with each
other. Despite facing opposition from their families due to their inter-caste relationship,
they decided to elope and get married. However, their families were outraged by their
decision and saw it as a threat to their "honour." In a brutal act of violence, Priya's father
and three brothers tracked down Rajesh's father, mother, grandparents and his 2 siblings
and killed them in their sleep. The police were informed, but they were reluctant to take
action against Priya's family due to their strong influence in the area. The incident
received widespread attention, with the media covering the story and people demanding
justice for Rajesh's family.
3. After months of protests and widespread media coverage, the pressure on the police to
take action against the perpetrators of the brutal murders increased. Eventually, evidence
against Priya's father and one of her brothers was uncovered, and they were arrested for
the crime they committed. The other two brothers, however, were still at large and being
hunted by the police. Since two brothers were absconding and had been declared as
proclaimed offenders, the trial court split up the case against them. During the trial, the
prosecution filed a petition under section 299 of the CrPC to record evidence in the
absence of the absconding accused.
4. As the trial began, it became evident that the accused had used their influence and power
to manipulate the local authorities and cover up their crime. However, with the support of
the public and the media, the case gained national attention, and the pressure on the
judiciary to deliver justice increased. Finally on 1/1/2006, after a long and gruelling trial,
the accused were found guilty of the murders, and the court handed down the Life
imprisonment to Priya's father and brother.

8
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

5. The government granted them remission and released them prematurely on 15th August
2022 on the eve of the 76th Independence Day. The decision was met with mixed
reactions from the public, with some questioning the government's decision to release the
convicts who had committed such a heinous crime. Others believed that they had served
their time and deserved a second chance. Nevertheless, the release of the convicts
sparked a debate on the country's justice system and whether or not it was truly serving
justice to the victims and their families.
6. The premature release of lifers by the state government had been a cause of concern for
an NGO "JusticeBridge", who filed a PIL. The NGO argued that it had deeply disturbed
the conscience of society. However, the court dismissed the PIL but gave a direction to
the state government. The court instructed the government to ensure that the life convict
release committee, which is headed by the Principal Secretary of the State Home
Department, convenes once every two months. The committee would review and make
decisions on the applications submitted by the convicts who are serving life
imprisonment.
7. As Priya's father and brother were released from prison, they were greeted by a large
crowd of well-wishers and supporters who hailed them as heroes for suffering for their
beliefs and principles. The community continued to celebrate her father and brother as
symbols of justice and hope, inviting them to speak at public gatherings and giving them
a hero's welcome wherever they went. On 1/1/2023 another tragedy struck when Priya's
father, brother, sister-in-law, and 10-month-old nephew were found dead in their room
due to carbon monoxide poisoning. It was later discovered that the gas had been released
through their air conditioner, leading to their untimely deaths.
8. Upon arriving at the scene of the crime, the police launched an investigation and soon
began to suspect Rajesh and Priya's involvement. After gathering evidence, they were
both arrested and charged with multiple counts of murder. Their children were taken into
state custody. The ensuing trial received widespread media attention, with the case being
dubbed the "Family Poisoning Case." Ultimately, the Principal Sessions Court of
Valluvarnadu of Aryavarta sentenced both Priya and Rajesh to death. On 10/04/2023
Priya filed an appeal, citing her pregnancy at the time of the crime and also a petition
seeking mercy.

9
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. WHETHER THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT OF

VALLUVARNADU, AFTER THOROUGHLY CONSIDERING THE DOCTRINE
OF RAREST OF RARE CASES, RIGHTFULLY SENTENCED THE
APPELLANT TO DEATH?

2. WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A GROSS VIOLATION OF NATURAL

JUSTICE, INCLUDING ITS PRINCIPLES AND OTHER RELEVANT
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS?

10
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Issue 1: Whether The Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court Of Valluvarnadu, After

Thoroughly Considering The Doctrine Of Rarest Of Rare Cases, Rightfully Sentenced The
Appellant To Death?
It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble High Court that the Hon’ble Principal Sessions
Court of Valluvarnadu has wrongfully sentenced the appellant, of the instant case, to death. The
Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court did not take any mitigating factors proposed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court into consideration. The Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court has overlooked the fact
that the appellant was pregnant during the perpetration of the crime and could possibly not have
contributed directly towards the commission of the crime. The Hon’ble Principal Sessions Court
failed to prioritise the doctrine of Reformation and acknowledge that India is a country that
practises the Reformative Theory of Punishment.

Issue 2: Whether There Has Been A Gross Violation Of Natural Justice, Including Its
Principles And Other Relevant Constitutional Provisions?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble High Court there have been gross violations of
natural justice, mainly its principles. There have been questionable infringements of certain
constitutional provisions. The counsel for the appellants argue on loose investigation, hastiness
of judiciary, involvement of media and many more aspects of the same.

11
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT OF

VALLUVARNADU, AFTER THOROUGHLY CONSIDERING THE DOCTRINE OF
RAREST OF RARE CASES, RIGHTFULLY SENTENCED THE APPELLANT TO
DEATH?

1.1 There exist multiple mitigating factors.

1. It is humbly submitted that there are certain factors, called the mitigating factors, that
tend to portray, to the Hon’ble Court, the reduced severity of a crime that is otherwised
punishable by death.
2. In the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab1, the Hon’ble Apex Court has specified
certain mitigating factors, originally postulated by Dr. Chitaley, and has stated that “these
are undoubtedly relevant circumstances and must be given great weight in the
determination of sentence”.
3. The aforementioned mitigating factors are:
a) That the offence was committed under the influence of extreme mental or
emotional disturbance.
b) The age of the accused. If the accused is young or old, he shall not be sentenced
to death.
c) The probability that the accused would not commit criminal acts of violence as
would constitute a continuing threat to society.
d) The probability that the accused can be reformed and rehabilitated. The State shall
by evidence prove that the accused does not satisfy the conditions c) and d)
above.
e) That in the facts and circumstances of the case the accused believed that he was
morally justified in committing the offence.
f) That the accused acted under the duress or domination of another person,
g) That the condition of the accused showed that he was mentally defective and that
the said defect impaired his capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct.

1
Bachan Singh vs State Of Punjab, (1982) 3 SCC 24

12
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

The case also mentions to the inexhaustive nature of mitigating factors and how there could be
the consideration towards the formulation of mitigating factors depending on the individual case.

1.2 The offence was committed under the influence of extreme mental or emotional
disturbance.
4. It is humbly submitted that, in the case of Manoj Suryavanshi v. State of Chattisgarh2, the
hon’ble Supreme Court of India commuted the death sentence of the appellant-accused,
who had kidnapped and murdered three children, to life imprisonment owing to the fact
that he was extremely mentally and emotionally disturbed.
5. It is humbly submitted that, in casu, the appellant’s father and brother, after the remission
of their sentences, were treated as heroes who upheld justice and were immensely
glorified in several public gatherings for the gruesome murder of the appellant’s family
by marriage, which primarily invigorates the fear and apprehension of death in the mind
of the appelant, resulting in extreme mental and emotional disturbance due to the same.

1.3 The appellant has two minor children in need of her motherly care and affection.
6. It is humbly submitted that in the case of Govind Pasi v. State of U.P.3, adjudicated by the
Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, the appellant’s sentence of death was commuted to life
imprisonment as he had a wife and a child who were both dependent on him.
7. It is humbly submitted that, in casu, the appellant is the mother of two minor children,
one of whom is a newborn infant, and both these children fundamentally require the
presence and nurturing care of their mother, which is to be considered as a quintessential
mitigating factor.

1.4 The appellant has not played a direct role in the perpetration of the crime.
8. It is humbly submitted that the appellant was pregnant during the commission of the
crime and, in no way, could she have contributed directly towards the perpetration of the
same, as a result of her physical incapability.

2
Manoj Suryavanshi vs State Of Chhatisgarh, SLP (Crl.) No. 8682 of 2014]
3
Govind Pasi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1004 of 2018

13
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

9. It is humbly submitted that, in the case of Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State
of Maharashtra4, the Hon’ble Supreme Court mentions to the commutation of death
sentence, of the accused persons, to life imprisonment since they merely participated in
the commission of the crime.

1.5 India promotes the Reformative Theory of Punishment.

10. It is humbly submitted that India is a country that vehemently support the Reformative
Theory of Punishment and the reflection of the same can be observed in provisions
belonging to several statutes.
11. Section 432 of the CrPC5 says that the government has statutory power under this section
that whenever an individual is convicted of any punishment, the government can suspend
or remit the punishment in entirety or in proportion at any period.
12. Section 433 of the CrPC6 enables the government to commute or change the punishment
of the offender from:
● a death sentence to any other form of punishment;
● life imprisonment to imprisonment not exceeding 14 years;
● rigorous imprisonment to simple imprisonment.
13. Section 54 of the Indian Penal Code7 allows for the commutation of the death penalty to
any other form of punishment, and Section 55 of the Indian Penal Code8 allows for the
commutation of a life sentence of 14 years in prison.

1.6 There are several legal precedents substantiating the Reformative Theory.
14. It is humbly submitted that the Indian jurisprudence has witnessed several cases in
support of the reformative theory of punishment and reformation of convicted persons.
15. It is humbly submitted that, in the judgment of Mofil Khan vs State of Jharkhand9, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court stated that it is obligated to obtain all relevant information about
the probability of the convicts’ transformation before actually enforcing the maximum
punishment of the death penalty, even if the accused is silent. Furthermore, the state is
4
Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 1478 Of 2005
5
Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Power to suspend or remit sentences.
6
Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Power to commute sentence.
7
Section 54 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Commutation of sentence of death.
8
Section 55 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Commutation of sentence of imprisonment for life.
9
Mofil Khan v. State of Jharkhand, Criminal Appeal No. 1795 of 2009

14
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

required to obtain evidence establishing that the accused has no chance of reformation or
restoration. “The possibility of the accused being rehabilitated and restored is one of the
mitigating factors. The State is required to obtain proof establishing that the accused has
no chance of transformation or restoration“
16. It is humbly submitted that the Supreme Court refused to increase the accused’s
punishment in the case of Gulab Singh v. Yuvraj Singh10, mentioning that the goal of the
Indian penal system is reformative.
17. Hon’ble Justice Krishna Iyer, then judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the
case of Mohd. Giasuddin v. State of A.P.11, stated that “every saint has past and every
sinner has a future”.

10
Gulab Singh v. Yuvraj Singh, 1995 Supp (4) SCC 623
11
Mohammad Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1977 AIR 1926

15
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

ISSUE 2: WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A GROSS VIOLATION OF NATURAL

JUSTICE, INCLUDING ITS PRINCIPLES AND OTHER RELEVANT
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VESTED WITH THE APPELLANT?

18. It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that there have been questionable
infractions of Natural Justice; both its principles and certain constitutional rights that
need substantiating in front of this Hon’ble High Court.

2.1 There has been no thorough procedure of investigation.

19. It was already humbly submitted that the appellant was pregnant during the commission
of the crime and was not in the physical condition to have directly perpetrated the crime.
20. However, even after the collection of evidence, the police have still suspected the
appellant of having a primary contribution to the crime and as a result of the
aforementioned evidence, the Hon’ble Sessions Court has charged, tried, convicted and
sentenced the appellant to death.
21. It is humbly submitted that, in the case of Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State
of Maharashtra12, the Hon’ble Apex Court cites how sentence of death of the accused
persons, of that case, were commuted to life imprisonment simply because they were
merely participating in the crime and did not play a primary role.
22. It is humbly submitted that in the case of Kannan v. State of T.N.13, the Hon’ble Apex
Court held that though The murders were committed for gain and pursuant to plans
hatched by some of the fellow accused. The one redeeming feature, so far as these two
accused are concerned, is that, notwithstanding the fact that they were directly
responsible for the murder of one of the victims, they were not the moving spirits of the
band of criminals but were really “junior partners”, if one may use such an expression, in
the perpetration of the crimes. Citing this the court the sentence for imprisonment for life
was substituted for the sentence of death.

12
Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No. 1478 Of 2005
13
Kannan v. State of Tamil Nadu, , 1982 2 SCC 350

16
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

2.2 The judiciary is conforming to the majoritarian view propagated by the media.
23. It is humbly submitted that there has been a very evident external impact on the
judiciary’s decision on the instant case, in various forms, which include the involvement
of the media and the conspicuous influence that the appellant’s father had and still seems
to have posthumously.

24. It is humbly submitted that in the case of State of Rajasthan v Komal Lodha14 the court
cited that “ it is also a matter of anguishing concern as to how public discourse on crimes
have an impact on trial, conviction and sentence in a case. The court's duty to be
constitutionally correct even when its view is counter-majoritarian is also a factor which
should weigh with the court when it deals with the collective conscience of the people or
public opinion. After all, society’s perspective is generally formed by emotionally
charged narratives. Such narratives need not necessarily be legally correct, properly
informed or procedurally proper. It has almost become a trend for the investigating
agency to present their version and create a cloud in the narrative in the collective
conscience of the society regarding the crime and the criminal. This undoubtedly puts
mounting pressure on the courts at all stages of the trial and certainly they have a
tendency to interfere with the due course of justice.
25. It is humbly submitted that there has been a clear influence of media on the adjudication
of the said case, the instant case was dubbed as the “family poisoning case” and garnered
attention from the public and this could have potentially influenced the verdict
pronounced by the Hon’ble sessions court of Valluvarnadu.

2.3 The Hon’ble Court possesses the power to reappraise evidence of the Hon’ble Principal
Sessions Court.
26. It is humbly submitted that section 367 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 197315 grants
the court the power to direct further inquiry to be made or additional evidence to be
taken. It states that when such proceedings are submitted and the high court thinks that a
further inquiry should be made into, or additional evidence taken upon, any point bearing

14
State of Rajasthan v Komal Lodha, 2022 SCC Online SC 1832
15
Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Power to direct further inquiry to be made or additional
evidence to be taken .

17
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

upon the guilt or innocence of the convicted person, it may make such inquiry or take
such evidence itself or direct it to be made or taken by the court of session.
27. In the above contentions, it has been humbly submitted that Mrs. Priya has only played
an ancillary role in the murder. Due to her pregnancy it would be impossible for her to
have directly participated in the execution of the crime itself. However due to the
inherent bias found in the investigation agency, the evidence adduced have been
presented and appraised in such a manner that she has been held responsible for the crime
equivalent to the burden of guilt placed on Rajesh.

2.4 The appellant is vested with the right to file a mercy petition.
28. It is humbly submitted that as per the MHA issued guidelines regarding clemency for
death row convicts, With respect to Guideline (iii) “cases where it is alleged that fresh
evidence is obtainable mainly with a view to seeing whether fresh enquiry is justified”.
29. As per Shabnam v Union of India16, the court held that the right to file mercy petitions to
the Governor of the State as well as to the President of India also remains intact. These
remedies are also of substance and not mere formalities. This remedy is again a
constitutional remedy as the Executive Head is empowered to pardon the death sentence
(this power lies with the President under Article 7217 and with the Governor of the State
under Article 16118 of the Constitution). Thus, power to pardon is a part of the
constitutional scheme which has been reposed by the people through the Constitution in
the Head of the State, and enjoys high status. In exercise of their powers, the President or
the Governor, as the case may be, may examine the evidence afresh and this exercise of
power is clearly independent of the judiciary.
30. It is humbly submitted that the mercy petition submitted by the appellant should not be
dismissed since the availing of a mercy petition is the constitutional right of the appellant
and the only opportunity for the appellant to submit alleging that fresh evidence is
available and therefore acting as a ray of hope for the condemned.

16
Shabnam vs Union Of India And Anr - Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 88 of 2015
17
Article 72 in The Constitution Of India 1949 - 72. Power of President to grant pardons, etc, and to suspend, remit
or commute sentences in certain cases
18
Article 161 in The Constitution Of India 1949 - 161. Power of Governor to grant pardons, etc,

18
 MULTI/MEGA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

PRAYER

WHEREFORE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ISSUES RAISED, ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AND

AUTHORITIES CITED, IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY
BE PLEASED TO ADJUDGE AND DECLARE:

1. To commute the sentence of death pronounced by the Hon’ble Principal Sessions

Court of Valluvarnadu to life imprisonment or any other punishment of a smaller
degree;

2. To hold the mercy petition filed by the appellant valid and that no procedure was
violated;

AND/OR
ANY OTHER ORDER AS IT DEEMS FIT IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY, JUSTICE AND
GOOD CONSCIENCE. FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPELLANT SHALL BE
DUTY BOUND FOREVER.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY
COUNSELS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

19