Team Code:

G.H.G. INSTITUTE OF LAW INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION

2024
___________________________________________________________________
Before

THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF LUDHIANA

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Vneet & Neeta………………………………………...….…………..…Petitioner

v.

Shalini……………………………..……………………….…..………........Respondent

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

___________________________________________________________________
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
________________________________________________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS
________________________________________________________________________________

LIST OF ABBEVIATIONS ......................................................................................................4

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .....................................................................................................6

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...................................................................................... 11

STATEMENT OF FACTS ..................................................................................................... 12

QUESTIONS OF LAW........................................................................................................... 15

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ............................................................................................. 16

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ................................................................................................. 18

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE ACCUSED SHOULD BE CONVICTED UNDER THE IPC PROVISIONS ?

ISSUE 2 :WHETHER IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ATTRACTING THE PROVISIONS OF IT, ACT ?

ISSUE 3 :WHETHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF PRIVACY VIOLATED OR NOT ?

 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
_______________________________________________________________________________
LIST OF ABBEVIATIONS
_______________________________________________________________________________

¶ Paragraph
§ Section
& And
Art. Article
Hon’ble Honorable
No. Number
v. Versus
IPC Indian Penal Code
IT Information Technology ACT
AIR All India Report
SCC Supreme Court Case
SC Supreme court
HC High Court
e.g. Example
i.e. That is
r/w Read With
UOI Union Of India
PIL Public Interest Litigation
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
_______________________________________________________________________________

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

_______________________________________________________________________________

TABLE OF
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
______________________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

______________________________________________________________________________
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
__________________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS

__________________________________________________________________________

BACKGROUND

Recently, Vineet and Neeta, a couple got contagious on Weetube, Fakebook, Intragram because of their reels and vlogs
about their new fast-food venture named “SALT’N PEPPER FAST FOOD” and their love life. They were living a
flourishing and respectable life in district Ludhiana of state Punjab.

UNANTICIPATED TURN OF EVENTS

Later their life took an unexpected turn when a private video of the couple leaked and went crazily viral on social media
and internet. This provoked and instigated ample of disrespectful mockery against the couple and each section of the
society started boycotting them.

REACTION BY THE COUPLE

As per the circumstances demanded, Vineet in his real time video session on Intragram clarified that, both he and his
wife Neeta had nothing to do with the video in issue. He further stated that high chances are there that the video was
deepfaked and their faces had been altered in the video with the help of ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE(AI). He
urged the public to support them in these hours of distress, as his whole family was going into mental agony after this
terrible incident.

Later on, Vineet registered an FIR in district Ludhiana, alleging that Shalini, one of his ex-employee of their fast-food
venture took this private video from their phone when she used to work with them. Since she was inefficient in work,
Vineet fired Shalini and as revenge of which she started asking for a ransom of Rs.2 Lakhs, failing which she would
leak the video. The incident happened after the refusal to pay above mentioned amount. The registered FIR cited
sections 384(extortion), 500(punishment for defamation), 509(word or gesture intended to insult modesty of women) of
IPC (Indian Penal Code), in addition to other relevant sections of IT Act.

REACTION OF SHALINI

In her defense, Shalini refused allegations made by Vineet. She remarked that since their fast – food venture ( SALT’N
PEPPER FAST FOOD) was going down, they did not needed much employees and that is why she was let go. She
added that the couple Vineet and Neeta wanted to re-seek the public attention in one way or other and that they
themselves leaked this video and now they are blaming her. Shalini is also sure that Vineet has no evidence to
substantiate his statement against Shalini in the above mentioned FIR.
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019
______________________________________________________________________________

QUESTIONS OF LAW

______________________________________________________________________________

ISSUE 1 :
WHETHER THE ACCUSED SHOULD BE CONVICTED UNDER IPC PROVISIONS ?

ISSUE 2 :
WHETHER IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ATTRACTING THE PROVISIONS OF IT, ACT ?

ISSUE 3 :
WHETHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF PRIVACY VIOLATED OR NOT ?
 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
______________________________________________________________________________

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

______________________________________________________________________________

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE ACCUSED SHOULD BE CONVICTED UNDER THE IPC PROVISIONS ?
It is submitted before the hon’ble court that all the charges against Shalini are false and not evidence-based. For the
charge of extortion, the property is not delivered by the person in fear which as the basic essential of extortion

ISSUE 2 : WHETHER IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ATTRACTING THE PROVISIONS OF IT, ACT ?

ISSUE 3 : WHETHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF PRIVACY VIOLATED OR NOT ?

 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
______________________________________________________________________________

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

______________________________________________________________________________

ISSUE 1 : WHETHER THE ACCUSED SHOULD BE CONVICTED UNDER THE IPC PROVISIONS ?

ISSUE 2 :WHETHER IT IS A FIT CASE FOR ATTRACTING THE PROVISIONS OF IT, ACT ?

ISSUE 3 :WHETHER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF PRIVACY VIOLATED OR NOT ?

 INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2024
______________________________________________________________________________

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

______________________________________________________________________________