D.E.

S SHRI NAVALMAL FIRODIA LAW COLLEGE

MOOT COURT 2022-23

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. NO.903 OF 2021

IN THE MATTER OF

GANESAN APPELLANT

Versus

STATE REP. BY
STATION HOUSE OFFICER RESPONDENT

UPON SUBMISSION TO
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF

THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

STUDENT NAME

POURNIMA GADIYA
CLASS: LLB IIIrd
DIVISION: B
ROLL NO: 99

1|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... 2

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ...............................................................................3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................ 4

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .................................................................... 5

STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................................................................. 6

ISSUES RAISED ................................................................................................. 7

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ......................................................................... 8

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ........................................................................ 9-14

PRAYER ............................................................................................................ 15

2|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIR All India Reporter

SCC Supreme court cases
SC Supreme Court
HC High Court
Hon’ble Honorable
Art. Article
v. / vs. Versus
UOI Union of India
& And
Ors. Others
Anr. Another
Sec. Section
Govt. Government
CRPC Criminal procedure code
IPC Indian penal code

3|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Bare Acts:

• THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950

• INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860
• CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE 1973

Dictionaries:

• Black’s Law Dictionary Ninth Edition

• Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary

Webliography:

• www.manupatra.com
• www.aironline.in
• www.main.sci.gov.in
• www.scconline.com

Cases:

• Raju Manjhi vs. State of Bihar, (2019) 12 SCC 784.

• Rafiq Ahmad vs. State of U.P., (2011) 8 SCC 300.
• K. Prema S. Rao vs. Yadla Srinivasa Rao, (2003) 1 SCC 217.

4|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The appellant has approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to hear and
adjudicate over the instant matter under Article 134 of the Constitution of India .

Article 134 of the constitution provides for the appellant jurisdiction of

Supreme Court in regard to criminal matters.

The High Court order dated 16.07.2019 passed by in Criminal R.C. Nos. 405 and 2012
for the conviction for the offence under the Section 397 IPC and by which the High
Court had dismissed the said revision applications and had confirmed the judgment and
order passed by the Learned trial Court confirmed by Learned First Appellate Tribunal -
Learned Sessions Court convicting the appellants offences under section 397 of IPC.

Therefore, the appellant herein has approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court to assail the
order of High Court

• Article 134 - 134. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in regard to criminal matters.

5|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

• The five accused from A1 to A5 with an intention to carry out a robbery

proceeded in a car on 19th October 1996, from Cuddalore to Panruti with a
knife and an iron rod at 8:00 pm.
• Accused ‘A1’, that is Ganesan, stayed in the car while the other four accused
that were A2 to A5 pushed the prosecution witness 1 who was Duraisamy from
his bicycle and hit him with the iron rod on his head and injured his right-hand
finger.
• One of the accused from A2 to A5 snatched his bag carrying Rs 60,000 and
jewellery worth 16 grams and ran away with the above-mentioned bag.
• One of the witnesses, ‘Palanivel’ tried to catch hold of the accused A2 to A5
but Benny who was A2 escaped by hitting him on his head and hand with an
iron rod.
• The charge sheet mentioned the names of all the five accused that are
punishable under Section 395 read with Section 391 of the Indian Penal Code.
• Though the accused A2 that is Benny and accused A5 that is Shahjahan were
still absconding.
• The charge sheet was split and tried between Ganesan, Prabakaran and
Shanmugam.
• In the trial Ganesan was named as A1, Prabhakaran as A3 and Shanmugam as
A5.
• It is submitted that during the confession of A2 before the Investigating
Officer about the joint attack and stealing of the jewels and cash in which he
stated that he – A2 Ganesan, Shajahan, Shanmugam and another person were
there. It is submitted that based on the aforesaid confession and recovery of an
iron rod and the information obtained in the confession of A2, there were
recoveries and arrest of the other accused.

• Sec 391 of IPC - Dacoity.—When five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to
commit a robbery, or where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or
attempting to commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission or
attempt, amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is said to
commit “dacoity”.

6|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
• Sec 395 of IPC - Punishment for dacoity.—Whoever commits dacoity shall be punished
with 1[imprisonment for life], or with rigorous impris-onment for a term which may extend
to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
• Sec 397 of IPC - Robbery, or dacoity, with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt.—If,
at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any deadly weapon, or causes
grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to any per-son, the
imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years.
• Sec 34 of IPC - Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.—When
a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each
of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him Alone.

7|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 397 IPC sustainable?

2. Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 391 IPC be challenged
on the ground that only four out of five accused came to be tried?

8|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 SUMMARY ARGUMENTS

ISSUE 1: -

Whether the conviction of the accused under section 397 IPC sustainable?

• In the present case, the prosecution has clearly established the presence of five
accused & it's is submitted that even the chargesheet was filed against all the five
accused persons, however two were absconded and therefore the trial preceded
against their accused. It is also submitted that otherwise there is ample evidence to
show the involvement of five accused persons and all the ingredients of section 397
is satisfied, so the conviction of accused under section 397 is sustainable.

ISSUE 2: -

Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 391 IPC be challenged on
the ground that only four out of five accused came to be tried?

• The prosecution contends that analyzing all the facts and circumstances of the case
The presence of the accused at the place of occurrence has been proved by the
prosecution, both through oral pieces of evidence and through documentary pieces
of evidence. There are parallel findings firstly, by the Trial Court then by the
Revisional Court and finally by the High Court so the conviction of accused cannot
be challenged under section 391

9|P a ge
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
ISSUE 1:

Whether the conviction of the accused under section 397

IPC sustainable?
• The counsel humbly submits that the conviction of the appellant under Section 397 of
the IPC is sustainable.
The section 397 of IPC provides for Robbery, or dacoity with attempt to cause death
or grievous hurt-If at the time of committing robbery or dacoity, the offender uses any
deadly weapon, or causes grievous hurt to any person, or attempts to cause death or
grievous hurt to any person, imprisonment the with which such offender shall be
punished shall not be less than seven years.

The ingredients of the section 397 are

a) The use of deadly weapon
b) The causing of grievous hurt
c) Attempting to cause death or grievous hurt.

Section 34 of IPC
Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.—When a criminal
act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of
such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.

• It is further submitted that in the present case, the prosecution has clearly established
the presence of five accused. It is submitted that even the charge-sheet was filed
against the five accused persons, however two accused absconded and therefore, the
trial proceeded against three accused. It is submitted that otherwise there is sample
evidence to show the involvement of five accused persons and therefore Section 395
IPC will be attracted.

• It is further submitted that even the presence of five persons involved in commission
of the offence has been established and proved and Section 395 IPC shall be attracted.

10 | P a g e
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
• It is submitted that the witnesses have identified some of the accused in the court and
at the same time some of the other accused have been arrested by the information
obtained from confession statements. It is submitted that even otherwise, non-
identification of all the accused by the witnesses would not vitiate the case of
prosecution especially in cases of robbery and dacoity.

• It is further submitted by learned counsel for the State that as per the settled
proposition of law the person charged with a heinous or grave offence can be
punished for a less grave offence of cognate nature. Reliance is placed on Rafiq
Ahmad vs. State of U.P., (2011) 8 SCC 300 and K. Prema S. Rao vs. Yadla
Srinivasa Rao, (2003) 1 SCC 217.

• It is submitted that in the present facts of the case, the charge was rightly framed for
the offences under Section 395 read with Section 397 IPC and the ingredients for the
offences have been proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt even as
otherwise in the alternative, the conviction of the accused under Section 397 IPC can
be sustained.

11 | P a g e
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
ISSUE 2:

Whether the conviction of the accused under Section 391

IPC be challenged on the ground that only four out of five
accused came to be tried?

• The counsel humbly submits that the section 391 of IPC state, The Dacoity as,
when five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery,
or where the whole number of persons conjointly committing or attempting to
commit a robbery, and persons present and aiding such commission or attempt,
amount to five or more, every person so committing, attempting or aiding, is
said to commit “dacoity”.
• The charge-sheet which was filed involved the names of five accused and what
is mandatory is the involvement of five or more persons in the commission or
attempting to commit robbery which would fall under the definition of dacoity
and not the fact that five or more persons were tried.
• The prosecution contends that analyzing all the facts and circumstances of the
case The presence of the accused at the place of occurrence has been proved by
the prosecution, both through oral pieces of evidence and through documentary
pieces of evidence. There are parallel findings firstly, by the Trial Court then by
the Revisional Court and finally by the High Court .
• It is also submitted that during the confession of A2 before the Investigating
Officer about the joint attack and stealing of the jewels and cash in which he
stated that he – A2 Ganesan, Shajahan, Shanmugam and another person were
there. It is submitted that based on the aforesaid confession and recovery of an
iron rod and the information obtained in the confession of A2, there were
recoveries and arrest of the other accused. In support of the submission that the
confessional statement can be relied upon on certain circumstances, reliance is
placed in the case of Raju Manjhi vs. State of Bihar, (2019) 12 SCC 784.

12 | P a g e
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced,

reasons given and authorities cited, this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to:

➢To upheld the judgment and order of Learned

Sessions Court convicting the appellants for the offence under
Section 397 IPC and 391 Of IPC
➢ To pass such other order or direction as it deems fit in the facts of
the present case and in the interest of justice.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT

13 | P a g e
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT