SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

Care | Courage | Competence | Collaboration

CONSTITUENT OF
SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED UNIVERSITY)
Reaccredited by NAAC with 'A' Grade

Symbiosis Campus, Opp. Pune InternationalAirport,

Symbiosis Road, Viman Nagar, Pune 411 014.

CLINICAL COURSE - IV - JOURNAL

(MOOT COURT EXERCISE AND INTERNSHIP)
V YEAR OF BA./BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

Academic Year : 2023-2024

SEMESTER - IX

Name of Student : Ioni Dsouza

Exam. Seat No. : 498041

Roll No. : 19010125437 Div. : E

Batch : 2019-2024 Programme : BA. / BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

PRN No.: 19010125437 Mobile No. : 7204097937

E-mail ID : ionidsouza6@gmail.com
 CLINICAL COURSE - IV
(MOOT COURT EXERCISE AND INTERNSHIP)

Learning Objectives:
1. To enable the student to understand not only the application of law in practice, but also the
citation ofrelevant rulings and the art ofconvincing the judges.
2. To train the students in methodical preparation of the case for achieving success as a lawyer
and further train in proper presentation of the case and come out with a clear statement of
points in controversy.
3. To facilitate the students to attend Civil Case and Criminal Trial Proceedings and observe the
proceedings in the court so as to understand the functional aspects of the components of the
Indian legal justice system.
4. To make the students understand how to deal with the client and collect the relevant
information.
5. To understand the nature of the case, issues involved in the case through the method of
interview technique.
6. To understand and apply the formats of the memorials and other documents submitted to the
court.
7. To study and understand pre-trail preparations and preparation of documents and court papers
by the advocates.

Learning Outcomes:
At the end of the course the student will:
1. understand not only the application of low in practice, but also the citation of relevant ruling
and the art ofconvincing the judges.
2. be also to preparethe case for achieving success as a lawyer and further the student will able to
present the case and come out witha clear statement ofpoints in controversy.
3. be able to understand working ofthe Civil Case and Criminal Trial Proceedings.
4. be able to dealwiththe client and collect the relevant information.
5. be in position to understand the nature of the case, issues involved in the case using interview
technique.
6. be able to understand and apply formats of memorial and other documents in the court practice.
7. be able to prepare memorial and other documents required for court proceedings.

1) Moot Courts (30 Marks)

Every student will do at least 3 moot courts in this semester with 10 marks for each. The
moot courts work will be on assigned problems and it will be evaluated for 5 marks for
written submission and 5 marks for oral advocacy.

2) Observation of Civil Proceedings (15 Marks)

Students will attend one Civil Case Proceeding in this semester. A student will submit a
report for the work done in this semester and all submissions and assignments will be
written in the format provided by the SLS, Pune. A student will maintain a record of all the
steps observed in the trial (including the facts of the case, arguments and orders) and the
days of court attendance in the report.

3) Observation of Trial (15 Marks)

Students will attend one Criminal Trial in this semester. A student will submit a report for
the work done in this semester and all submissions and assignments will be made as per the
format provided by SLS, Pune. A student will maintain a record of all the steps observed in
the trial (including the facts of the case, arguments and orders) and the days of court
attendance in the report.

1
4) Interviewing Techniques and Pre-trial Preparations & Internships (30 Marks)
4.1 Interviewing sessions
4.1.1. Interviewing session-I
4.1.2. Interviewing session - II
A report should be prepared as per the format provided by SLS, Pune
4.1.3. Preparation of Documents and Court Papers by the Advocates and Procedures for
filing Petition/ Suit etc. A report should be prepared as per the format provided by SLS,
Pune.

5) Viva-Voce (10 Marks)

Books Recommended :
— Sue Painter - Thorne, Karen J. Sneddon, Moot Court Workbook: Finding Educational Success
and Competition Glory, Wolters Khuwer (2017)
— John Snape, Gary Watt, How to Moot : A Student Guide to Mooting, Oxford University Press
(2010)
— Sarah L. Cooper, Scarlett McArdle, Preparing to Moot : A Step-by-Step Guide to Mooting,
Routledge (Taylor& Francis Group) (2017)

2
 INDEX
Sr. No. Description of Practical Training Page No. Marks Obtained

1. MOOT COURTS (30 Marks)

a) Moot Court - I (10 Marks)
b) Moot Court - II (10 Marks)
c) Moot Court - III (10 Marks)

2. OBSERVATION OF CIVIL CASE PROCEEDINGS:

(15 Marks)

3. OBSERVATION OF CRIMINAL TRIAL :

(15 Marks)

4. INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES AND PRE-TRIAL

PREPARATIONS & INTERNSHIPS: (30 Marks)
4.1 Interviewing Sessions
4.1.1. Interviewing Session - I
4.1.2. Interviewing Session - II
4.1.3. Preparation of Documents and Court Papers by the
Advocates & the Procedure for filing Petition/ Suit
etc.

5. VIVA-VOCE (10 Marks)

3
 INDEX
Sr. No. Description of Practical Training Page No. Marks Obtained

4
 MOOT COURT - I

TITLE :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction

Writ Petition (Civil) No. [234/2023]

In the Matter of:

Ms. X…………………………………………..Petitioner

Versus

Mr. Y………………………………………...Respondent

JURISDICTION :

MEMORIAL FOR THE PETITONER

The petitioner submits that the present petition falls within the jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, as the case involves the enforcement
of fundamental rights enshrined under Part III of the Constitution. Furthermore, the matter
pertains to the violation of the petitioner's privacy, dignity, and the recognition of a new
dimension of fundamental rights in the digital age. The petitioner asserts that the Supreme Court
is the appropriate forum to adjudicate upon these issues and provide redressal.
Article 32: Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in
the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may
be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2),
Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its
jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).
(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for
by this Constitution.
This article provides for the right of individuals to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of
the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. It empowers the Supreme Court
to issue various types of writs to ensure the protection of these rights.

The petitioner, therefore, humbly seeks the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court to address the grave
and urgent issues raised in this writ petition.
FACTS:
1. Ms. X, residing in Village Amrai, District Ganpoi, developed affection for Mr. Y from
Village Mawai, District Ganpoi, their neighboring village. They were schoolmates and
pursued the same graduation degree.
2. On 25/05/2023, Mr. Y visited Ms. X's home under the pretext of discussing a college
event. Taking advantage of her being alone, he engaged in inappropriate behavior and
recorded it on his phone.
3. Ms. X cautioned Mr. Y on 25/05/2023, 27/05/2023, and 28/05/2023, demanding deletion
of related files from his phone. Mr. Y responded with threats, including sharing images
online.
4. Fearing the repercussions of publicizing the incident online, Ms. X endured further threats
and encounters with Mr. Y between 01/06/2023 and 15/06/2023.
5. Mr. Y persisted in contacting Ms. X, even as she declined his invitation on 01/07/2023. On
04/07/2023, lewd content was circulated from a fake social media profile bearing Ms. X's
photo.
6. Learning of the fake profile, Ms. X suffered immense mental distress. The incident led to
her suspension from college on 12/07/2023 due to concerns over the institution's
reputation.
7. Filing an FIR on 15/07/2023 under sections 376, 292, 465, 469, and 509 of the IPC,
coupled with sections 66, 66(C), 66(E), 67, and 67A of the IT Act, Ms. X sought justice.
8. With Mr. Y's awareness of the FIR, he fled to evade arrest, resulting in no apprehension.
9. Ms. X acknowledged that the trial process would take time, realizing the prolonged impact
of explicit content on her future prospects.
10. On 21/07/2023, Ms. X approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, requesting the deletion of
explicit content and recognition of the 'Right to be forgotten' as a fundamental right under
Article 21.

ISSUE (S) :

1. Has the accused's creation of a fake profile, sharing explicit content, and recording
objectionable acts without consent infringed upon the petitioner's right to privacy (IPC
Section 376) and autonomy? Does this also constitute offenses under Sections 292 of the
IPC and Sections 66 and 67A of the IT Act?
2. To what extent has the distribution of explicit content online, leading to severe mental
trauma, suspension from college, and potential harm to the petitioner's reputation, affected
their future prospects? Does this impact relate to offenses of insulting the modesty of a
woman (IPC Section 509) and violation of privacy (IT Act Section 66E)?
3. Should the judiciary acknowledge the 'Right to be forgotten' as an inherent facet of an
individual's right to privacy (Article 21), particularly in instances involving the removal of
explicit materials from online platforms? How does this concept align with the provisions
of the IT Act, including Section 66C and Section 79 that deal with intermediary liability?
4. How can the legal system ensure a prompt and efficient resolution of the case, considering
 the potential long-term consequences on the petitioner's well-being and reputation? Are
there measures within the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) that can be employed to
expedite the trial process?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

Issues 1

Has the accused's creation of a fake profile, sharing explicit content, and recording objectionable
acts without consent infringed upon the petitioner's right to privacy (IPC Section 376) and
autonomy? Does this also constitute offenses under Sections 292 of the IPC and Sections 66 and 67A
of the IT Act?

Violation of Privacy (IPC Section 376) and Consent

The accused's creation of a fake profile, sharing explicit content, and recording objectionable acts without
consent represents a blatant invasion of the petitioner's privacy and autonomy. IPC Section 376 is relevant
as it concerns rape, which extends beyond physical violation to encompass psychological and emotional
trauma. This provision recognizes that consent is paramount and any act without it constitutes a breach of
privacy and personal dignity.
In the landmark judgment of State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar, the Supreme Court
upheld the importance of consent, establishing that any non-consensual physical act amounts to a violation
of an individual's right to privacy and personal liberty, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution. This judgment reinforces the argument that the accused's actions infringed upon the
petitioner's right to privacy and autonomy.

Argument: Distribution of Obscene Content (IPC Section 292)

IPC Section 292 pertains to the distribution of obscene materials. In the current context, the accused shared
explicit content without the petitioner's consent, thereby violating this provision. The Supreme Court, in
the case of Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, held that obscenity must be judged from the
perspective of its impact on society and the individual's right to privacy. The petitioner's right to be
shielded from the distribution of such content has been grossly disregarded.
Argument: Cyber Harassment (IT Act Sections 66 and 67A)

The creation of a fake profile and sharing of explicit content online constitutes cyber harassment, violating
IT Act Sections 66 and 67A. Section 66 deals with computer-related offenses, and Section 67A addresses
publishing or transmitting sexually explicit content. In Sharat Babu Digumarti v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
the Delhi High Court ruled that unauthorized sharing of explicit content online constitutes a breach of
privacy and personal integrity, emphasizing the need to protect individuals from such harassment.

From the petitioner's legal standpoint, the gravity of the accused's actions becomes even more apparent
when analyzed through the lens of established legal principles and precedents. The creation of a fake
profile, dissemination of explicit content, and recording of objectionable acts without consent go beyond
mere violations of law; they strike at the core of an individual's right to privacy, dignity, and autonomy.
These actions not only inflicted immediate harm but also have far-reaching implications on the petitioner's
mental well-being and future prospects. The petitioner's lawyer contends that the accused's behavior runs
contrary to the principles of justice, fairness, and respect for an individual's autonomy, as enshrined in
various provisions of the law and bolstered by case law such as Madhukar Narayan Mardikar and Sharat
Babu Digumarti. The petitioner's pursuit of justice in this matter is not only about seeking legal redressal
but also about asserting the fundamental rights of every individual to be protected from such reprehensible
violations. The petitioner's lawyer urges the court to acknowledge the profound impact of the accused's
actions and deliver a verdict that upholds the sanctity of an individual's right to privacy and personal
dignity.

Issue 2

To what extent has the distribution of explicit content online, leading to severe mental trauma,
suspension from college, and potential harm to the petitioner's reputation, affected their future
prospects? Does this impact relate to offenses of insulting the modesty of a woman (IPC Section 509)
and violation of privacy (IT Act Section 66E)?

The distribution of explicit content online, resulting in severe mental trauma, suspension from college, and
potential damage to the petitioner's reputation, raises a substantial legal issue. This impact can be argued as
constituting offenses of insulting the modesty of a woman under IPC Section 509 and violation of privacy
under IT Act Section 66E. Let's delve into these arguments in detail:

A. IPC Section 509 - Insulting the Modesty of a Woman: IPC Section 509 deals with an offense committed
when someone intentionally insults the modesty of a woman through words, gestures, or any other act. The
petitioner's situation can be linked to this offense due to the distribution of explicit content without
consent, leading to severe emotional distress and humiliation. The content's dissemination could be seen as
a derogatory act that directly insults the petitioner's modesty. Case Law: In the case of State of Punjab v.
Major Singh (AIR 1967 SC 63), the Supreme Court of India held that any act that outrages the modesty of
a woman violates her dignity. The Court's emphasis on protecting a woman's dignity in the face of
offensive conduct can be applied to the petitioner's predicament, where the explicit content distributed
without her consent results in a violation of her modesty.

B. IT Act Section 66E - Violation of Privacy: Section 66E of the Information Technology Act deals with
the violation of privacy, specifically targeting the capturing, publishing, or transmission of private images
of a person without their consent. The explicit content in question was captured and distributed without the
petitioner's consent, thereby invading her privacy and causing severe emotional distress. Case Law: In
Kalyani Mathivanan v. The Registrar General (W.P. No. 32113 of 2013), the Madras High Court ruled that
the unauthorized publication of private photographs constitutes a violation of privacy. This precedent
underscores the importance of safeguarding an individual's privacy rights, especially in the digital age, and
lends support to the petitioner's argument.

C. Impact on Reputation and Future Prospects: The dissemination of explicit content, leading to the
suspension from college and causing harm to the petitioner's reputation, can have far-reaching
consequences on her personal and professional life. This impact aligns with the petitioner's contention that
her future prospects may be hampered by the content's circulation, making her vulnerable to stigma, social
isolation, and potential career setbacks.

D. Mental Trauma and Emotional Distress: The petitioner's severe mental trauma resulting from the
distribution of explicit content highlights the emotional distress she has suffered. This distress could be
seen as a direct consequence of the accused's actions, further emphasizing the gravity of the offenses
committed.
The presented arguments aptly establish the petitioner's case by highlighting the multifaceted impact of the
distribution of explicit content online. Drawing upon IPC Section 509 and IT Act Section 66E, coupled
with relevant case laws, the petitioner's lawyer effectively underscores the violation of dignity, modesty,
and privacy. The profound implications on the petitioner's reputation, mental well-being, and future
prospects further emphasize the gravity of the accused's actions. These arguments collectively strengthen
the petitioner's quest for legal recourse, anchored in principles of justice and protection of fundamental
rights, urging the court to redress the harm caused by the unauthorized dissemination of explicit content.

Issue 3 - Should the judiciary acknowledge the 'Right to be forgotten' as an inherent facet of an
individual's right to privacy (Article 21), particularly in instances involving the removal of explicit
materials from online platforms? How does this concept align with the provisions of the IT Act,
including Section 66C and Section 79 that deal with intermediary liability?

The concept of the 'Right to be forgotten' is gaining prominence globally as a necessary extension of an
individual's right to privacy, enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This right recognizes an
individual's prerogative to request the removal of certain personal information from online platforms when
such information becomes outdated, irrelevant, or infringes upon their dignity and reputation. The
alignment of this right with the IT Act's provisions, including Sections 66C and 79, is pivotal for
safeguarding an individual's digital privacy and reputation.

Article 21: Upholding Individual Dignity and Privacy: The 'Right to be forgotten' is rooted in the broader
right to privacy and personal dignity, enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This right
encompasses an individual's control over their personal information and the right to be free from
unnecessary intrusion. Recognizing the 'Right to be forgotten' in cases involving explicit materials aligns
with the fundamental ethos of Article 21, as it aims to mitigate the ongoing harm inflicted upon individuals
due to the circulation of objectionable content.

Case Law: The landmark Puttaswamy judgment (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India,
2017) by the Supreme Court affirmed that privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21. The
court emphasized the importance of privacy in the digital age and recognized that the right extends to
controlling one's personal data.

IT Act Provisions and Intermediary Liability: The IT Act, while establishing provisions for online conduct
and data protection, includes Section 79, which deals with intermediary liability. This section provides a
"safe harbor" to intermediaries (online platforms) from liability arising from third-party content, provided
they act in good faith and upon receiving appropriate orders. However, the 'Right to be forgotten' intersects
with this provision when explicit content poses harm to an individual's reputation and mental well-being.

Case Law: The Supreme Court, in the Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) case, upheld the
constitutionality of Section 79 but interpreted it to mean that intermediaries must comply with court orders
for removal of illegal or defamatory content.

Balancing Fundamental Rights: Recognizing the 'Right to be forgotten' involves a delicate balance between
an individual's right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression. In cases of explicit materials
involving private individuals, the harm caused by the continued circulation of such content often
outweighs any public interest in its dissemination. This balance ensures that individuals are not unduly
subjected to long-term harm and mental distress.
Case Law: The European Court of Justice's ruling in the Google Spain case (C-131/12, 2014) established
that individuals have the right to request the removal of certain search results that are inadequate,
irrelevant, or excessive in relation to the purposes of data processing. While not directly applicable to
India, this case demonstrates the global recognition of the right's significance.

The petitioner's appeal for the acknowledgment of the 'Right to be forgotten' emerges as an imperative
response to the evolving challenges posed by the digital age to individual dignity and privacy. Grounded in
the constitutional essence of Article 21, the recognition of this right not only aligns harmoniously with
provisions of the IT Act but also reflects a commitment to striking a judicious balance between personal
rights and the responsible exercise of freedom of expression. By embracing this progressive perspective,
the court has the opportunity to fortify its role as a custodian of fundamental values while ensuring that the
digital realm respects the same standards of respect and dignity as the physical world.

Issue 4

How can the legal system ensure a prompt and efficient resolution of the case, considering the
potential long-term consequences on the petitioner's well-being and reputation? Are there measures
within the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) that can be employed to expedite the trial process?

The prompt and efficient resolution of the case is essential to mitigate the potential long-term
consequences on the petitioner's well-being and reputation. The delay in legal proceedings can exacerbate
the trauma suffered by the petitioner and impede their access to justice. Within the Criminal Procedure
Code (CrPC), there exist provisions that can be harnessed to expedite the trial process, thus safeguarding
the petitioner's rights.

Delay in legal proceedings can cause profound harm to the petitioner, both emotionally and reputation-
wise. The trauma of the incident, compounded by the continuous circulation of explicit content and the
suspension from college, further emphasizes the urgency of expediting the trial. To address this concern,
we can refer to the landmark case of Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (AIR 1979 SC
1360). In this case, the Supreme Court recognized the inherent right of speedy trial as a fundamental right
under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court emphasized that justice delayed is justice denied,
and the petitioner's right to a fair trial includes the right to a speedy trial.

Moreover, the CrPC provides provisions that advocate for a swift trial, such as Section 309 which directs
that criminal cases should be heard and disposed of as expeditiously as possible. This aligns with the
petitioner's right to a fair and timely trial. In the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2008) 2 SCC 409, the
Supreme Court reiterated the importance of expediting criminal trials and discouraging unwarranted
adjournments. The court emphasized that justice should be delivered promptly to preserve the sanctity of
the judicial process and uphold the petitioner's rights. Additionally, the petitioner can invoke Section
439(6) of the CrPC, which mandates that bail applications involving offenses punishable with
imprisonment of seven years or more should be heard and decided on the day the application is made. This
provision ensures that the trial does not linger merely due to the pendency of bail applications.
Conclusion: The petitioner's request for a prompt and efficient resolution of the case is not only justified
for their well-being but also aligned with the fundamental principles of justice. The cited case laws and
provisions within the CrPC provide a strong legal foundation to support the petitioner's plea for an
expedited trial process, thereby preventing prolonged suffering and potential harm to their reputation.
 PRAYER :

As a result in view of the problems presented, arguments advanced, and authorities referenced, it
is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court adjudge and declare:
1. Direct the concerned court to ensure an expeditious trial, considering the petitioner's well-
being and reputation. Uphold the petitioner's right to a fair trial as recognized under
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
2. Issue directions to preserve digital evidence and impose an injunction on the accused to
prevent further distribution of explicit content related to the petitioner.
3. Recognize the 'Right to be forgotten' within the scope of Article 21, and direct social
media platforms to remove explicit content involving the petitioner to protect their dignity.
4. Award appropriate compensation for the emotional distress caused by the accused's
actions and grant any other suitable remedies.
5. Kindly grant any other relief or direction that this Hon'ble Court deems just and equitable,
considering the severity of the matter, the petitioner's fundamental rights, and the
petitioner's genuine concern for their well-being and reputation.

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES :

1. Indian Penal Code, 1860

2. Information Technology Act, 2000
3. Constitution of India, 1950
4. Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (AIR 1979 SC 1360)
5. Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2008) 2 SCC 409
6. Sharda v. Dharmpal (2003) 4 SCC 493
7. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) 6 SCC 241
8. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1
9. R. Rajagopal v. State of T.N. (1995) 2 SCC 161
10. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra (2002) 4 SCC 388
11. K.S. Puttaswamy (Aadhaar-5) v. Union of India (2019) 1 SCC 1
12. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1
13. R. v. Brown (1994) 1 AC 212
14. Menaka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248
15. Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011) 4 SCC 454
16. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) 2 SCC 746
17. Francis Coralie Mullin v. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981) 1 SCC
608
18. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) Supp SCC 87
19. Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India (1996) 6 SCC 756
20. Indian Journalists Union v. Union of India (1986) 3 SCC 727

MOOT COURT HELD ON:

MOOT COURT JUDGES :

STUDENT ADVOCATE FOR :

15
 MOOT COURT - II

TITLE :

JURISDICTION :

16
FACTS:

17
FACTS:

18
ISSUE (S) :

19
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

20
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

21
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

22
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

23
PRAYER :

24
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES :

25
MOOT COURT HELD ON:

MOOT COURT JUDGES :

STUDENT ADVOCATE FOR :

26
 MOOT COURT - III

TITLE :

JURISDICTION :

27
FACTS:

28
FACTS:

29
ISSUE (S) :

30
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

31
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

32
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

33
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS:

34
PRAYER :

35
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES :

36
MOOT COURT HELD ON:

MOOT COURT JUDGES :

STUDENT ADVOCATE FOR :

37
 OBSERVATION OF CIVIL CASE PROCEEDINGS :

1. TITLE OF THE CASE : M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others Vs. Mr. Ramen Lakhar

2.
PARTICULARS OF APPELLANT / PLAINTIFF :
Appellant / Plaintiff: M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others
Nature of Entity: Dealership firm affiliated with Hyundai Motors India Ltd.
Business Address: Kushan Plaza, G.S. Road, Wadala, Mumbai.

3. PARTICULARS OF RESPONDENT:
Mr. Ramen Lakhar, his own a grocery store in Dadar, Mumbai.

4. ADVOCATE OF THE APPELLANT / PLAINTIFF :

Adv. Dinesh Javdekar
Adv S.R Manohar
Adv. Venkatesh Shewale.

5. ADVOCATE OF THE RESPONDENT:

Adv Prashant Naik
Adv Jaydatta Shinde

6. IN THE COURT OF: Civil Judge, Sweree, Mumbai Mr. S. Joshi

38
7. CONTENTS OF THE PLAINT IN BRIEF :
(COPY OF PLAINT MAY BE ATTACHED INADDITION)

The plaintiffs in this case are M/S Mukesh Hyundai and Others, a dealership entity affiliated with
Hyundai Motors India Ltd. The defendant named is Sri Ramen Lahkar. The underlying matter
concerns a legal dispute stemming from a transaction involving the repair of a Hyundai Verna car,
bearing the registration number MH 01-AG-6100, at the premises of the plaintiff's establishment.
Situated at Kushan Plaza, G.S. Road, Ganeshguri, the plaintiff firm specializes in automobile
services, including vehicle repair and maintenance.
According to the plaintiff's account, on the date of May 25, 2023, the defendant brought his Hyundai
Verna car to the plaintiff's workshop for the purpose of rectifying accidental damages sustained by
the vehicle. In response to this, the plaintiff executed necessary repair work on the car as per the
provided Repair Order No R200907652. Subsequent to the successful repair, the plaintiff generated
an invoice amounting to Rs 1,00,736/-, representing the costs associated with the repair work
carried out on the defendant's vehicle.
A critical aspect of this transaction lies in the assurance provided by the defendant at the time of
accepting the repaired vehicle. The defendant, as per the plaintiff's assertion, made a verbal
commitment to settle the invoiced amount within a duration of one month. However, the defendant
allegedly failed to fulfill this payment commitment, thereby defaulting on his obligation to
remunerate the repair costs.
In response to the defendant's non-payment and lack of responsiveness despite repeated reminders,
the plaintiff undertook further legal action. A formal legal notice dated July 4, 2023, was dispatched
to the defendant, urging him to clear the outstanding sum of Rs 1,00,736/- along with an interest
rate of 10% per annum within a span of 15 days upon receipt of the notice.
Despite the delivery of this legal notice, the defendant remained unresponsive and failed to display
any intention to settle the outstanding dues. Consequently, the plaintiff took the decision to initiate
a legal suit seeking a monetary decree. The objective of this suit was to secure a judgment directing
the defendant to remit a total sum of Rs 1,00,736/- in addition to an accrued interest of Rs 12,79.50/-
, calculated at a rate of 10% per annum. This suit was filed with the primary intention of compelling
the defendant to fulfill his monetary obligation and to honor his initial commitment.

AGRUMENTS OF THE PLAINT IN BRIEF :

7.
(COPY OF PLAINT MAY BE ATTACHED INADDITION)

Plaintiff's Arguments:
Presented by Mr. P.K. Deka, the plaintiff's case was straightforward. They stated that the defendant
entrusted his Hyundai Verna for repairs on September 25, 2020, due to an accident. After repairs,
an invoice of Rs 1,00,736/- was generated. The plaintiff highlighted the defendant's commitment to
pay within a month, which he allegedly failed to honor despite reminders. The legal notice dated
February 14, 2021, was presented as evidence of the plaintiff's efforts to recover the payment.
 Defendant's Arguments:
Defending through Mr. D. K. Kothari, the defendant's position was clear: he denied the accident
and damage claim. He stated that there was no cause of action for the suit as no accident occurred.
The defendant questioned the credibility of the plaintiff's claim, especially the Repair Order's
authenticity. He highlighted the absence of necessary signatures on the Repair Order and the
invoice, casting doubt on the validity of the repairs and the plaintiff's claims. The defendant
ultimately sought the case's dismissal.

8. OBSERVATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS :

The courtroom atmosphere during the proceedings was tense yet professional, with both legal teams
presenting their arguments with vigor and precision. As the plaintiff's and defendant's counsels
eloquently articulated their respective cases, the judge's unwavering attention underscored the
significance of the matter at hand. The courtroom itself seemed to embody the scales of justice,
poised to weigh the evidence and testimonies impartially.
Throughout the session, the plaintiff's representative, Mr. P.K. Deka, adeptly laid out a
comprehensive narrative, emphasizing the chronological events leading to the issuance of the credit
invoice. The air was charged with anticipation as the plaintiff's evidence, including the Repair Order
and the legal notice, were meticulously presented. The plaintiff's efforts to prove the defendant's
verbal commitment to payment were evident, as they aimed to establish a legally binding obligation.
On the other side, Mr. D. K. Kothari, representing the defendant, skillfully cast doubt on the
plaintiff's claims. His cross-examination of the Repair Order's authenticity and the lack of requisite
signatures was met with astute skepticism from the judge. The defendant's denial of an accident or
damages opened a door to the question of whether there was a legitimate basis for the repair invoice.
The proceedings, like a legal chess match, unfolded with strategic moves and counterarguments,
leaving the courtroom immersed in the intricacies of legal dispute.
In this charged atmosphere, both sides' arguments echoed in the minds of those present,
underscoring the importance of establishing truth and justice. The courtroom, functioning as a
crucible for evidence, legal expertise, and reason, set the stage for the ultimate resolution of the
case, leaving those in attendance eagerly awaiting the court's verdict.

9. ORDER OF THE COURT (IF APPLICABLE):

Upon meticulous consideration of the presented evidence, the court's verdict reflected a judicious
assessment of the claims and counterclaims. The judge's measured analysis of the Repair Order, the
absence of signatures, and the defendant's denial of liability formed the cornerstone of the decision.
The court astutely acknowledged the plaintiff's efforts to establish a commitment to payment, yet
emphasized the necessity of substantiating claims through incontrovertible documentation.
In rendering the verdict, the court balanced the burden of proof between the parties. The judge's
ruling underscored the fundamental principle that while the plaintiff's narrative carried weight, the
absence of critical signatures and the defendant's vehement denial eroded the foundation of the
claim. Ultimately, the court's order, though reflecting a dismissal of the plaintiff's suit, reinforced
 the importance of irrefutable evidence in substantiating legal claims, setting a precedent for the
careful examination of both factual and procedural aspects of future cases.

10. COMMENTS ON THE CASE:

This case presents a classic instance of the legal adage "burden of proof." The intricacies lie not
only in the contrasting narratives put forth by the plaintiff and defendant but also in the weight of
evidence needed to tip the scales in favor of one party. The absence of essential signatures on crucial
documents raises significant doubts, reminding us of the critical role meticulous documentation
plays in legal proceedings. The court's verdict, dismissing the case due to the lack of irrefutable
evidence, underscores the necessity for parties to present comprehensive and substantiated claims.
Furthermore, the case serves as a cautionary tale about verbal commitments and the challenges of
proving them in court. The plaintiff's contention about the defendant's promise to pay within a
month illustrates how challenging it can be to prove oral agreements without corroborating
evidence. This underscores the importance of ensuring that important agreements are properly
documented, avoiding potential disputes that may arise due to ambiguities or lack of evidence.
Lastly, the case highlights the complexities that legal professionals encounter while presenting and
defending cases. Both advocates adeptly navigated the complexities of law, highlighting the
strengths and weaknesses of their respective cases. Their presentations showcased the art of legal
argumentation and cross-examination. The case underscores how the legal system is a rigorous
process that demands meticulous attention to detail, sound legal reasoning, and compelling evidence
to sway the course of justice.

11. SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF THEADVOCATE

44
 OBSERVATION OF CRIMINAL TRIAL:

1. 1. TITLE OF THE CASE : Sudhakar Gaikwad (Petitioner/Appellant) Vs. The

State of Maharashtra (Respondent)

2. PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT / APPELLANT:

1. Mr. Sudhakar Gaikwad, a resident of Mumbai, running a small enterprise in Dadar.

3. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENT:

The State of Maharashtra

4. ADVOCATE OF THE COMPLAINANT / APPELLANT :

1. Adv Sunil Shinde (AOR), Adv Sushil Sharma, Adv. Venkatesh Shewale.

5. ADVOCATE OF THE RESPONDENT:

Adv. Govind Birajdar, Adv. Suman Sehgal

6. IN THE COURT OF: Justice Deepak S Gaikwad

7. CONTENTS OF THE COMPLAINT / APPEAL ETC. IN BRIEF :

(COPY OF COMPLAINANT / APPEAL MAY BE ATTACHED INADDITION)
 a. The Petitioner, Mr. Sachin Sonave: A resident of Mumbai, Mr. Sonave runs a small
enterprise in Dadar. He is from a respectable middle-class family and is an old friend of Mr.
Vasant More (Accused No.2) and an acquaintance of Mr. Tilak Gaikwad (Accused No.1).
b. Connection with Mr. Vasant More and Mr. Tilak Gaikwad: Mr. More is the cousin of Mr.
Gaikwad, the son of a local political leader.
c. The Deceased Partners: Mr. Ram Lakhani and Mr. Lohit Bata were partners in a textile
business who sought partnership with Mr. Gaikwad but exploited him, not holding their end
of the bargain.
d. The Night of the Incident: Mr. Sonave was summoned to Mr. Gaikwad's house where he
found the deceased bodies and was handed the knife used for the murder.
e. Police Apprehension: The police apprehended all accused, and the trial was initiated.
f. High Court Judgment: The High Court acquitted Mr. More and Mr. Gaikwad but convicted
Mr. Sonave on circumstantial grounds.

Background & Developments

On the night of November 25th, 2019, a murder occurred in the city of Pune, India. The deceased
was found in a lifeless state in an alley, with multiple stab wounds. Upon investigation, the police
discovered circumstantial evidence pointing to Mr. Sachin Sonave's involvement. He was found
near the crime scene with the murder weapon, a knife, in his possession. Telephonic records further
linked him to co-accused Mr. Vasant More and Mr. Tilak Gaikwad. Several witnesses also testified
to having seen Mr. Sonave at the location around the time of the murder. However, he maintained
his innocence throughout, claiming that he had no motive to commit the crime and that he had been
framed.

The case gained significant attention due to the prominence of the accused and the intricacy of the
evidence. The prosecution heavily relied on circumstantial evidence, including the murder weapon,
witness testimonies, and telephonic records, to build a case against Mr. Sonave. The defense,
however, argued that the evidence was flawed and that Mr. Sonave's longstanding friendship with
the other accused did not translate into a motive for murder. They also questioned the reliability of
the witnesses and challenged the handling of forensic evidence. Both sides referenced various legal
precedents to support their arguments, leading to a complex legal battle that eventually reached the
Supreme Court, where the appeal was allowed, paving the way for further scrutiny of the evidence
and arguments.
7. ARGUMENTS OF THE COMPLAINT / APPEAL ETC. IN BRIEF :
(COPY OF COMPLAINANT / APPEAL MAY BE ATTACHED INADDITION)

A. Lack of Motive:

a. No Reason for Murder: The defense contended that Mr. Sonave had no motive to murder
the deceased, thereby questioning the logic behind implicating him.
b. Relationship with the Accused: The defense emphasized Mr. Sonave's longstanding
friendship with Mr. More, arguing that this did not translate into a motive for murder.

B. Flaws in Circumstantial Evidence:

a. Reliability of Witnesses: The defense questioned the reliability of the witnesses,

highlighting inconsistencies in their statements and possible bias.
b. Forensic Evidence Challenges: The defense raised questions about the handling and analysis
of the murder weapon, casting doubt on its connection to Mr. Sonave.
c. Phone Records Misinterpretation: The defense argued that the phone calls between the
accused were routine and not indicative of conspiracy.

C. Legal Precedents:

a. Wakkar v. State of U.P (2011) 3 SCC 306: The defense referred to this judgment to
emphasize the importance of motive in a criminal case and argued for acquittal based on a
lack of clear motive.
b. Hanumant Govind Nargundkar v. State of M.P., AIR 1952 SC 343: The defense invoked
this precedent to highlight the principles that govern the appreciation of circumstantial
evidence, emphasizing that the chain of events should be complete without any reasonable
doubt.

D. Humanitarian Grounds:

a. Family Background and Reputation: The defense portrayed Mr. Sonave as an individual
with no criminal history and a reputation for honesty, pleading for a humane consideration
of the case.

Arguments by Defendants:

A. Circumstantial Evidence:

a. Presence at the Crime Scene: The prosecution emphasized that Mr. Sonave was found at the
crime scene on the night of the murder, asserting that this placed him in close proximity to
the event.
b. Possession of the Murder Weapon: The murder weapon was discovered in Mr. Sonave's
possession. The prosecution presented forensic evidence linking the knife to the crime.
 c. Witness Testimonies: Multiple witnesses testified to seeing Mr. Sonave at the crime scene,
adding weight to the circumstantial evidence.
d. Telephonic Records: Phone records indicating calls between Mr. Sonave and the other
accused on the night of the incident were presented to establish a connection.
e. Lack of Alibi: The prosecution pointed out that Mr. Sonave could not provide a substantial
alibi for his whereabouts during the time of the murder.

B. Legal Precedents:

a. State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava (1992) 2 SCC 86: The prosecution relied on this
judgment to highlight the importance of circumstantial evidence and how it can lead to a
conviction.
b. Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116: The prosecution
invoked this case to emphasize the validity of a conviction based on circumstantial evidence,
even in the absence of an eyewitness.

8. OBSERVATION OF THE TRIAL IN BRIEF:

During the legal proceedings, the judges of the Supreme Court demonstrated meticulous attention
to the details of the case, often questioning both sides to clarify points and probe deeper into the
evidence. The complexity of the circumstantial evidence led to thorough examination and debate
on the principles and precedents surrounding such evidence. The justices scrutinized the reliability
and coherence of the prosecution's evidence and the plausibility of the defense's arguments. Their
engagement with the case reflected a sincere pursuit of truth and justice, striving to unravel the
narratives presented by both parties. The questions posed by the court were sharp and insightful,
reflecting a comprehensive understanding of the law and an unwavering commitment to upholding
the principles of justice.

9. ORDER OF THE COURT (IF APPLICABLE)

After careful consideration of the evidence, arguments, and pertinent legal precedents, the Supreme
Court reached its decision on the appeal filed by Mr. Sachin Sonave. In a comprehensive and well-
reasoned judgment, the court allowed the appeal, recognizing the significance of the issues raised
by the appellant. The order explicitly addressed the shortcomings and inconsistencies in the
circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution and acknowledged the validity of the concerns
raised by the defense. The court's ruling emphasized the need for a just and fair trial, stressing the
importance of the presumption of innocence and the prosecution's burden to prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. The court's decision to grant special leave for the appeal marked a pivotal moment
 in the case, opening the door for further examination of the evidence and arguments, and reflecting
a profound commitment to the rule of law and the pursuit of justice.

10. COMMENTS ON THE TRIAL:

The expanded arguments from both the plaintiff and the defendant encapsulate the legal battle that
transpired in this case. While the prosecution built a case around strong circumstantial evidence,
the defense countered with legal principles and questioned the validity of the presented evidence.
The arguments underscore the complexities of legal reasoning and the balance between relying on
facts and interpreting the law. With the Supreme Court allowing the appeal, the stage is set for a
detailed examination of these arguments, which may pave the way for new legal interpretations and
precedents.

11. SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF THEADVOCATE

52
 4.1) INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES
4.1.1) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS - 1

1. IN THE CHAMBER OF :

2. PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT :

3. DATE :

53
4. INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR HIS/HER
CLIENT :
(MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)

54
5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

55
5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

56
6. LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EVIDENCE :

57
7. COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE :

8. OBSERVATION IF ANY :

9. SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCATE

58
 4.1) INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES
4.1.2) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS - II

1. IN THE CHAMBER OF:

2. PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT :

3. DATE :

59
4. INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR HIS/HER
CLIENT :
(MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)

60
5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

61
5. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF :

62
6. LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF
EVIDENCE :

63
7. COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE :

8. OBSERVATION IF ANY :

9. SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCATE

64
4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR
FILING CASE/ PETITION etc. (Civil) :

65
4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR
FILING CASE/ PETITION etc. (Civil) :

66
4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR
FILING CASE/PETITION etc. (Civil) :

67
4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR
FILING COMPLAINT/ CASE etc. (Criminal) :

68
4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR
FILING COMPLAINT/ CASE etc. (Criminal) :

69
1. NAME OF EXAMINERS :

a)
b)

2. DATE :

3. REMARKS BY THE EXAMINERS :

DATE : (SIGNATURE OF THE EXAMINER)

(SIGNATURE OF THE EXAMINER)

79
80