CHANDIGARH

UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES

Moot court Memorandum file:

Subject-MOOT COURT, LLI-559

SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED TO:

NAME= Jigyasu Gaba MISS Shivani Kumari.

UID =19BAL1045

Semester =10th

Branch=BBA+LLB
 MOOT COURT ASSIGNMENT, 2024

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF MOHALI

IN THE MATTER OF:

The State……………………………………………………………………………………………………(Prosecution)
Versus
Akshay and Harish…………………………………………………………………………………………(Accused)

UNDER THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 READ WITH THE INDIAN
PENAL CODE, 1860

UPON SUBMISSION THE HON’BLE DISTRICT JUDGE

MEMORIAL OB BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

1
 Table Of Contents

1. List Of Abbreviations………….……………………………………………………….………………….3
2. List Of Authorities …………………………………………………………………………..……………. 4
3. Statement Of Jurisdiction………………………………………………………………………………. 5
4. Statements Of Facts………………………………………………………………………………………. 6
5. Charges Framed ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
6. Summery Of Argument………………………………………………………………………………….. 8
7. Arguments Advanced ……………………………………………………………………………………. 9
Issue2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 11
8. Prayer …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13

2
 LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

AIR All India Reporter

IPC Indian Penal Code

CrPc Code of Criminal Procedures

Asst. Assistant

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

v. Versus

S/d Signature/Undersigned

Hon’ble Honourable

3
 LIST OF AUTHORITES

LEGISLATION
1. THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860.
2. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973.
3. THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950.
CASES REFERRED

• State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa (AIR 1996 SC 207):

• Mohd Akhtar Hussain v. Asst. collector of Customs (AIR 1988 SC 238):
• State of Maharashtra v. Bhalu (2009) 4 SCC 489:

BOOKS REFERRED

• KD GAUR TEXTBOOK OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, SIXTHE EDITION, 2018.

• UNIVERSAL CRIMINAL MANUAL, 2017 EDITION.

• SHAILENDER MALIK, THE INDIA PENAL CODE, TWENTY FIFFTH

EDITION,2011

• RATANLAL AND DHIRAJLAL, THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, THIRTHY FOURTH

EDITION, 2012
LEGAL DATABASE

• WWW.YOURARTICLELIBERARY.COM
• WWW.LEGALSERVICEINDIA.COM
• WWW.INDIANKANOON.ORG
• WWW.LAWRATO.COM
• WWW.MANUPATRA.COM

4
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Prosecution has approached the Hon'ble District Court of Mohali under 134 of the Constitution
of India, 1950. The Hon'ble District Court has jurisdiction to try the instant matter under Section 177
read with Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Section 177:
177. Ordinary place of inquiry and trial-
Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was
committed.'
Read with Section 209:
• 209. Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it-

When in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the
Magistrate and it appears to the Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session,
he shall-
(a) commit the case to the Court of Session;

(b) subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the accused to custody during, and
until the conclusion of, the trial;

(c) send to that Court the record of the case and the documents and articles, if any, which are to be
produced in evidence;

(d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the commitment of the case to the Court of Session.'

5
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. That Aarohi, a twenty-year-old student pursuing Chartered Accountancy in Leebay City, belongs to a
lower middle-class family, where her father works as a clerk in a private firm and her mother is a
housewife.

2. That Akshay, Aarohi's Accounts teacher, developed romantic feelings towards her and gifted her an
expensive watch on her birthday.

3. That Despite Aarohi's parents' rejection of Akshay's proposal for marriage due to his role as her
teacher, Akshay continued to pursue Aarohi, including through unauthorized means such as phone calls
and internet contact.

4. That Despite warnings from Aarohi's parents to cease contact, Akshay persisted in his unwanted
advances, leading to harassment and emotional distress for Aarohi and her family.

5. That Harish, who had a paternal relationship with Akshay since his parents' death, suggested a plan
involving coercion and violence to forcibly marry Aarohi without her consent.

6. That on April 3, 2020, Akshay and Harish attempted to abduct Aarohi, resulting in Akshay throwing
acid on her face when she resisted, causing severe physical injuries.

7. That Aarohi was promptly hospitalized, and medical interventions, including surgeries, were
conducted to treat her injuries.

8. That A First Information Report (FIR) was filed, and Aarohi provided her statement to the
authorities regarding the events leading up to and including the acid attack.

6
 CHARGES FRAMED
Charge 1: Whether Akshay's perpetration of the acid attack on Aarohi constitutes attempted murder
and grievous bodily harm?

Charge 2: Whether the actions of Akshay and Harish in planning and executing the abduction and acid
attack on Aarohi constitute criminal conspiracy?

7
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Issue 1

Whether Akshay's perpetration of the acid attack on Aarohi constitutes attempted murder and grievous
bodily harm?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that the accused Mr. Akshay’s not guilty of attempted
murder and grievous bodily harm. While Akshay's actions resulted in severe harm to Aarohi,
establishing attempted murder or grievous bodily harm requires meeting stringent legal standards. The
prosecution must prove Akshay's specific intent or knowledge corresponding to the respective offenses
beyond a reasonable doubt. Without concrete evidence of intent to kill or cause grievous hurt, the
charges may not be sustained solely based on the severity of Aarohi's
Injuries.
Issue 2
Whether the actions of Akshay and Harish in planning and executing the abduction and acid attack on
Aarohi constitute criminal conspiracy?

is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble Court that both the accused Mr. Akshay and Mr.
Harish is not guilty of committing criminal conspiracy. While Akshay and Harish collaborated in
planning and executing the abduction and acid attack on Aarohi, establishing criminal conspiracy
requires meeting stringent legal standards. The prosecution must prove the existence of a deliberate
agreement between them to commit the illegal acts beyond a reasonable doubt.
Without concrete evidence of a meeting of minds and awareness of the unlawfulness of their actions,
the charges of criminal conspiracy may not be sustained solely based on their collaboration in the
criminal acts.

8
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Issue 1
Whether Akshay's perpetration of the acid attack on Aarohi constitutes attempted murder and grievous
bodily harm?

It is humbly contended that Mr. Akshay (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') is not guilty of
attempted to murder under section 307 and Grievous Hurt under section 320 of Indian Penal Code
1860 (hereinafter referred as 'IPC'). It is to be noted that essential elements of section 307 and 320 are
as follows:
1.Section 307 essentials Act: The accused must have done an act.
• Intention or Knowledge: The accused must have done the act with the intention of causing death or
with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death.
• Circumstances: The act must have been done under circumstances that, if it had resulted in death,
would have amounted to murder.
• Actual Harm not Necessary: It is not necessary for the act to cause actual harm or death, as long as
the accused had the intention to cause death or knew that the act was likely to cause death. '
2. Section 320 essentials Specific Injuries: The injuries listed under Section 320 IPC include:
a. Emasculation (removal of the testicles)
b. Permanent privation of the sight of either eye
c. Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear
d. Privation of any member or joint
e. Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint
f. Permanent disfiguration of the head or face
g. Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth
h. Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be in severe bodily pain for 20 days or
more
• Nature and Extent of Injuries: The injuries must be of a serious nature, causing significant
impairment, disfigurement, or endangering life.
• Causation: The injuries must have been caused by the accused through a deliberate or
Negligence act

1.Attempted murder
In Indian law, attempted murder is covered under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section
307 of the IPC states: "Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such
circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to

9
fine. “That the accused did not directly lead to a situation where death was imminent or intended, it can
be argued that the circumstances do not align with an attempt to commit murder as defined under
Section 307 IPC. Highlighting the absence of direct actions aimed at causing death can weaken the
prosecution's case. That the defense can present the argument that the harm caused was unintentional
and resulted from a different motive or circumstance. That there was provocation involved in the
situation leading to harm, these factors can be raised in defense of the accused. That Akshay was under
the influence of Harish. As the actions were taken in response to a perceived threat or provocation can
impact the applicability of Section 307 IPC.
1.2 Grievous Hurt
Grievous bodily harm is covered under Section 320 of the IPC. Section 320 of the IPC defines grievous
hurt and lists various injuries that qualify as grievous bodily harm. Akshay did not have the intention to
kill Aarohi. There is no evidence to suggest that he specifically intended to cause her death through the
acid attack. The mere fact that he threw acid does not establish an intent to commit murder.
Important Judgements:

• This case held that the offense of attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC requires proof of
intention or knowledge to cause death. Mere preparation to commit the offense is not
1
sufficient; there must be a direct act towards the commission of the offense.?
• In this case, the Supreme Court reiterated that to establish the offense of attempted murder
under Section 307 IPC, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
accused had the intention to commit murder. Mere presence at the scene of the crime or
2
knowledge of the commission of the crime is insufficient.

1. Mohd. Akhtar Hussain v. Asst. Collector of Customs (AIR 1988 SC 238)

2. State of Maharashtra v. Balu (2009) 4 SCC 489

10
 Issue 2
Whether the actions of Akshay and Harish in planning and executing the abduction and acid attack on
Aarohi constitute criminal conspiracy?
It is humbly contended that both Mr. Akshay and Mr. Harish (hereinafter referred to as the
"accused') is not guilty of criminal conspiracy under section 120b of Indian Penal Code 1860
(hereinafter referred as 'IPC'). It is to be noted that essential elements of section 120b are as follows:
• Agreement: There must be an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or a
legal act by illegal means, or to achieve an illegal purpose. The agreement itself is the essence of the
offense, and it may be inferred from circumstantial evidence.
• Intention to Commit Offense: The parties to the agreement must have the intention to commit the
offense that is the subject of the conspiracy. This means that they must intend to engage in conduct that
constitutes an offense under the IPC.
• Criminal Object: The agreement must relate to an offense punishable under the IPC. It can include
any offense, whether it is punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term of
two years or upwards.
• Act or Omission: Although criminal conspiracy can be established even if the planned illegal act is
not committed, the parties must take some step-in furtherance of the conspiracy. This can be an act or
an omission that is intended to advance the unlawful objective of the conspiracy.
• Culpability of Parties: All individuals who are part of the conspiracy, regardless of their role or level of
involvement, are considered equally culpable under Section 120B IPC.
1.1 Criminal Conspiracy
Section 120B defines criminal conspiracy as when two or more persons agree to commit an illegal act or
a legal act by illegal means, or to achieve an illegal purpose. the definition of criminal conspiracy under
Section 120B IPC is broad and may encompass a wide range of activities. This broadness could lead to
the inclusion of acts that do not warrant criminal liability, potentially infringing on individuals' rights to
freedom of association. The critical point of contention would be whether there was a deliberate
agreement between Akshay and Harish to commit the legal acts mere collaboration or joint action may
not necessarily constitute criminal conspiracy

11
 Important judgement:
State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa (AIR 1996 SC 207):

Facts: In this case, the accused persons were alleged to have conspired to commit the murder of a
person named Bhanwar Singh. The accused were charged with criminal conspiracy under Section 120B
IPC.

Judgment: The Supreme Court held that the essence of the offense of criminal conspiracy under
Section 120B IPC lies in the agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or a legal
act by illegal means. The court emphasized that mere knowledge, acquiescence, or association with the
principal offender is not sufficient to establish the offense of conspiracy.
There must be evidence of a meeting of minds between the conspirators to commit the illegal act.

Key Points:

• The case reaffirms the principle that the crux of the offense of criminal conspiracy lies in the
agreement between the conspirators.
• Mere association with the principal offender or knowledge of the crime is not enough to establish
conspiracy; there must be evidence of a deliberate agreement.
• The case underscores the importance of proving the existence of a meeting of minds between the
conspirators to establish the offense under Section 120B IPC.4
In the context of the scenario involving Akshay and Harish, this judgment provides guidance on the
essential elements required to establish criminal conspiracy. It highlights the necessity for clear evidence
demonstrating a deliberate agreement between Akshay and Harish to commit the illegal acts of
abduction and acid attack on Aarohi. Without such evidence, the charge of criminal conspiracy may not
be sustained.

12
 PRAYERS
Therefore, in the light of issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited. It is most humbly
submitted before this hon'ble court that if it may please grant following directions or order.

a. The accused persons be acquitted from the charges levelled against each of them.
b. The prosecution team, including the assistant public prosecutor be saddled with heavy penalties to
compensate for the stigma caused to the accused and the loss and damage to their reputation and
standing in the society.
AND/OR

Pass any other order as it deems fit in the interest of Equity, Justice and Good Conscience.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

Place: Mohali S/d

Date: March 19,2023 Counsel for ace

13