School of Law

MOOT COURT AND INTERNSHIP

(LAW 1071)

SAIBAA GHAZALA
19213226
X Semester

BBA LL.B (Hons.)

2023-24
 School of Law

MOOT COURT AND INTERNSHIP

(LAW 1071)

SAIBAA GHAZALA
19213226
X Semester

BBA LL.B (Hons.)

2023-24
 SCHOOL OF LAW
CHRIST (DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY)
DELHI NCR

Clinical Course - Moot Court and Internship (LAW 1071)

DECLARATION

This record consists of a consolidated record of the Moot Court Exercises and
Observations of Civil and Criminal proceedings before the courts, submitted in
partial fulfillment of the requirements of Clinical Course of Moot Court and
Internship for the Tenth Semester of the B.B.A. LL.B (Hons.) course, for the
Academic year 2023-2024.

The work in this record is entirely my original work and has not been submitted to
any other University for the award of a degree or diploma or fellowship.

Place: __________
Date: __________

Saibaa Ghazala

Ms. Akanksha Singh Dr. Fincy Pallissery

Faculty Head of the Department

Page 1
 INDEX

S. No. Particulars Page No.

1. Introduction to Moot Court and Internship 3-4

2. Court Attendance Report 5-12

3. Moot Court Exercise 1 13-43

4. Moot Court Exercise 2 44-65

5. Moot Court Exercise 3 66-94

6. Internship Experience and Observations 95-100

Page 2
 I. INTRODUCTION TO MOOT COURT AND INTERNSHIP

In the dynamic landscape of legal education, the journey from academia to the professional realm
is often navigated through experiential learning avenues like Moot Court competitions and
internships. These twin pillars of legal education play a pivotal role in honing the skills and
competencies essential for a successful career in law. Particularly in the Indian context, where the
legal system is multifaceted and constantly evolving, the importance of Moot Courts and
internships cannot be overstated.

Moot Court competitions serve as invaluable platforms for law students to refine their advocacy
skills and immerse themselves in the practical application of legal principles. Through simulated
court proceedings, participants are tasked with analyzing complex legal issues, crafting persuasive
arguments, and presenting them before esteemed panels of judges. This process not only enhances
students' understanding of substantive law but also fosters critical thinking, oral advocacy, and the
ability to think on one's feet - all essential attributes for a successful legal practitioner.

In the Indian context, where courtroom advocacy holds immense significance, participation in
Moot Court competitions provides students with firsthand experience in navigating the intricacies
of the country's legal system. It allows them to familiarize themselves with the procedural aspects
of litigation, develop courtroom demeanor, and gain confidence in articulating legal arguments.
Moreover, Moot Courts often simulate real-life cases, thereby exposing students to diverse areas
of law and preparing them for the multifaceted nature of legal practice in India.

Complementing the theoretical foundation laid in classrooms, internships offer law students a
glimpse into the practical realities of the legal profession. Whether through placements in law
firms, corporate legal departments, or with legal aid organizations, internships provide students
with hands-on experience, allowing them to apply theoretical knowledge to real-world scenarios.
From drafting legal documents to conducting legal research and observing courtroom proceedings,
internships offer a holistic understanding of the legal ecosystem and its various facets.

Page 3
constitutional, and corporate law, offers interns a plethora of opportunities to explore their interests
and gain exposure to different practice areas. Moreover, internships serve as networking platforms,
enabling students to forge connections with seasoned legal professionals and gain insights into
potential career paths.

In conclusion, Moot Court competitions and internships stand as indispensable components of

legal education, molding students into competent and well-rounded legal professionals. By
fostering advocacy skills, deepening legal knowledge, and providing practical exposure, these
experiential learning opportunities bridge the gap between academia and the professional realm.
In the Indian context, where the legal profession is marked by its richness and complexity, the
significance of Moot Courts and internships in shaping the professional trajectory of law students
cannot be overstated. As students embark on their journey towards becoming legal luminaries, the
lessons learned through Moot Courts and internships will serve as guiding beacons, empowering
them to navigate the intricacies of India's legal landscape with confidence and proficiency.

Page 4
II. COURT ATTENDANCE REPORT

Page 5
 A. THE IRREPLACEABLE VALUE OF COURTROOM IMMERSION

The law exists not in sterile pages of textbooks, but in the vibrant theater of the courtroom. While
theory lays the foundation, it is direct observation of trials that transforms aspiring legal minds
into confident courtroom advocates. Witnessing the adversarial process unfold in real-time, with
its human drama and intricate legal maneuvers, offers an irreplaceable education that textbooks
and lectures simply cannot replicate. Law school courses equip you with legal principles, but
observing their application in actual trials puts flesh on theoretical bones. You see how rules of
evidence play out, how arguments are crafted, and how judges navigate complex legal issues. This
bridges the gap between theory and practice, giving you a practical understanding of how the
legal system functions. Watching seasoned lawyers in action is a masterclass in effective advocacy.
You witness persuasive opening statements, masterful witness examinations, and compelling
closing arguments. This invaluable exposure helps you develop your own courtroom skills, from
confident public speaking to navigating complex evidentiary procedures. In conclusion, court
attendance and trial observation are not mere add-ons to legal education; they are essential
ingredients for shaping well-rounded lawyers.

B. CIVIL CASE OBSERVATION

Case 1: Writ Petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction, or order holding that the action/inaction of the
respondent in not paying the due amount of the petitioner contractor for the admitted work
executed by him for the respondents as per their agreement (Name of the case is not disclosed
subject to confidentiality)

Court High Court of Delhi

Court Room Court No. 7

Bench Hon’ble Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad

Case Type Writ Petition

Page 6
Date visited January 15, 2024

CASE SUMMARY

Facts
I. The Petitioner approached before the High Court being aggrieved
by the inordinate delay by the Respondents in expeditiously
processing the bills raised by the Petitioner in lieu of the services
provided to the Respondents under a signed agreement entered
between the petitioner and Respondent for hiring of digital
videography, digital still photography, CCTVS, LED TV’S of
various sizes as mentioned in the documents and web casting etc
during general elections 2019-2020.
II. Petitioner wrote letters and emails to the Respondent No. 2 for
clearing the dues against the services provided by the Petitioner.
However, no response was ever received by the Petitioner.
III. That being aggrieved by the delay of payment for the services,
Petitioner filed this present Writ Petition before this Hon’ble Court.
After the matter was listed and arguments exchanged, the Hon’ble
Court issued an order and directed the Respondents to pay the due
amount. However, even after the order, when the Respondents
failed to do so, the Petitioner filed a Contempt Case in the High
Court of Delhi.
IV. Even before the Contempt Court, the Respondents gave several
Undertakings that they will be crediting the amount, however they
failed to do so. After all this, the Respondent approached the
Hon’ble Court by filing an application for recall of order given
by the Delhi HC in the Writ Petition.

Reply On Behalf Of The Petitioner/Non-Applicant To The Application Filed By

Respondents Seeking Clarification/Recall Of Order Passed By This Hon’ble Court.

Preliminary I. It was claimed that the application filed before the Hon’ble Court
Objections for withdrawing the undertaking is mala fide in nature as the
Respondents have given not just one but several undertakings

Page 7
 before this Hon’ble Court where they have admitted that the amount
to be paid to the Petitioner is not disputed, hence the claim of
miscommunication/discoordination is baseless.
II. That the Respondents have indulged in the practice of forum
shopping by filing this application before this Court and the
continuance of these proceedings would be a total abuse of the
process of the court.

Proposition Whether an Undertaking given by the Counsel for State can be withdrawn
Researched on on a later stage?

Drafting Drafted Reply to the Application filed by the Respondents including

Preliminary Submissions/Objections and Para Wise Reply

Order Obtained Favorable order based on our Reply i.e., Application filed by
the Respondents got dismissed

Case 2: Divorce Petition by Husband on the grounds of Cruelty (Name of the case is not
disclosed subject to confidentiality). We were representing the Respondent - Wife.

Court Principal Judge, Family Court, Karkardooma

Court Room Court No. 5

Bench Sh. Sanjeev Jain

Case Type Hindu Marriage Act - Divorce Petition

Date visited January 12, 2024

Status Listed for Final Arguments

Page 8
 CASE SUMMARY

Facts
I. Marriage between the parties was solemnized on 12.10.2018
according to Hindu rites and rituals in the presence of family
members and relatives. The Respondent could live with the
Petitioner only for 46 days, during the time when she was living in
her matrimonial Home. Respondent always wanted to reside with
the Petitioner, however, it was the Petitioner who did not want to
stay with the Petitioner in Kolkata and therefore, left the Petitioner
at her matrimonial Home.
II. That the marriage between the parties was not consummated owing
to the alleged callous attitude of the Respondent. The Petitioner
alleged that Respondent kept pressurising the Petitioner to go for a
penis enlargement surgery which caused lot of mental agony, pain
and harassment, and that theRespondent used to rebuke the
Petitioner to ask his parents for his share in the property and if he
refused, she would frame his family members into unnecessary
litigation.

Arguments/Submissio
I. Whether marriage of the Petition could not be consummated dude
ns to Dismiss the
to the callous attitude of the Respondent?
Petition
II. Whether Respondent ever taunted the Petitioner that “Tumhara
xxxx Chhota hai” or pressured him for a penis enlargement surgery.
III. Whether Respondent refused to reside with the Petitioner in
Kolkata?
IV. Whether Respondent used to rebuke the Petitioner to ask his parents
for his share in the property and if he refused, she would frame his
family members into unnecessary litigation. Whether Respondent
also used abusing language for Petitioner and his family?
V. Whether the father of the Respondent admitted in call that the
family of the Petitioner did not demand dowry from Respondent?

Page 9
 Proposition
Whether the presumption under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act can
Researched on
only be displaced by a strong preponderance of evidence, and not by a mere
balance of probabilities?

Drafting
Assisted in drafting Brief Written Arguments on Behalf of Respondent

Order
The Judge ordered the parties to either have a telephonic conversation/meet
in person and discuss the matter and report the same to Cout on the next
date.

C. CRIMINAL CASE OBSERVATION

Case: Second Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of Regular Bail on behalf of the
Accused

Court Karkardooma Court

Court Room Court No. 61

Bench Sh. Rajat Sharma

Case Type Regular Bail Application

Offence Charges framed under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code

Date visited January 17, 2024 January 18, 2023 January 23, 2024

Status Filed the case before Listed for Admission Listed for Arguments
the Registry of Case

CASE SUMMARY

Page 10
 Facts
I. On the basis of information received SI Anil alongwith HC Subodh
reached at GTB Hospital where it was revealed that a person was
declared brought dead by the doctor. Thereafter, the above police
persons visited the scene of crime where they found heavy blood
was flooded in the area, and blood-stained bricks and stones were
laying.
II. That as per the best knowledge of the accused, Police has arrested
the accused/applicant on 26.11.2022 merely on the basis of one
CCTV Footage where applicant/accused was found running in the
street allegedly near the spot of incident, along with other persons
III. That the accused filed the first bail application on 13.01.2023 u/s
439 Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail and the same was dismissed by
this Hon’ble Court through its order dated 01.04.2023.

Grounds for Bail

I. That the ground that the applicant can threaten the eyes witnesses
does not arise as Applicant has no prior criminal antecedent.
Further, all the other accused persons have already been released on
bail by the Juvenile Court.
II. That accused belongs to a lower middle-class family and his father
works as a guard in one residential apartment. Thus, there is no
chance that he can even exert his influence on the witnesses or in
the ongoing investigation.
III. There is also no chance that he can tamper any other evidence. The
only evidence against the accused/applicant is the CCTV footage
where he was found running with other persons.
IV. That the evidence against the Applicant is primarily the
unsubstantiated allegations of the Police and allegedly selected
CCTV footage showing absence of the applicant from the scene of
crime, but merely found running in the street with other persons.
Further, all the documents have been seized and are in possession
of the court. During the course of the protected trial, the custody of
the Accused serves no useful purpose.

Page 11
 Anticipatory Bail U/s
That the Hon'ble Court though its order dated 21.11.2022 disposed of the
438 Cr.PC
application for anticipatory bail.

Drafting
Assisted in drafting Second Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant
of Regular Bail on behalf of the Applicant/Accused

Order
Order - The Second Bail Application was also rejected by the Court.

D. CONCLUSION AND REFLECTIONS

Overall, the experience at all these courts was very enriching as a student. I visited various courts
from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, High Court of Delhi, National Consumer Disputes Resolution
Commission to the Delhi District Courts such as Karkardooma Court, Tis-Hazari, Saket, Patiala
House Court where I learned how to file cases before the Registry, how the matters are listed, and
presented before a particular Court, and learnt about judicial proceedings such as Admission of
cases, arguments, Cross examination, and how orders are given. Apart from these, I also got to
learn even as little information as different types of Cause lists and in what sequence matters are
heard before the Court. Further, I got exposure to drafting including Rejection of Plaint under
Order VII Rule 1, Bail Application, Written Submissions and Counter Affidavit in Special Leave
to Appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

Page 12
III. MOOT COURT EXERCISE 1

Page 13
c

TEAM CODE: TC01

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME OF INDICA

Under Article 32 of the Constitution of Indica

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

CG CAR COMPANY AND ORS. Petitioners

V.

UNION OF INDICA Respondent

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS

Page 14
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [TABLE OF CONTENTS]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS .........................................................................................II

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .............................................................................................. IV

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .................................................................................VII

STATEMENT OF FACTS ................................................................................................VIII

ISSUES RAISED ..................................................................................................................IX

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ...........................................................................................X

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ............................................................................................. 1

I. SECTION 69 OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT IS NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY

VALID ................................................................................................................ 1
A. Union of Indica is bound to follow International Obligations....................................1

B. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act is violative of the Right to Privacy.....4

C. The provisions of Section 69 of the Information Technology Act are vague and lack
clarity………………………………..…………………………………………………………6

II. GOVERNMENT CONTROL OVER THE USE OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC TECHNIQUES IS TOO

RESTRICTIVE IN NATURE................................................................................................11

A. The mandated sharing of cryptographic techniques with government entities

jeopardizes Innovation and Foreign Investment…………………………………………….11

B. Decryption of data affects credibility and breaches trust of consumers ……............ 14

PRAYER ................................................................................................................................XI

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE| I

Page 15
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

§ Section

¶/¶¶ Paragraph/Paragraphs

& And

AIR All India Reporter

Annx Annexure

Anr. Another

Art. Article

Cri. Criminal

Honourable
Hon’ble

Id ibidem

IT Information Technology

Ors. Others

p./pp. Page/Pages

Pvt. Private

SC Supreme Court

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | II

Page 16
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

SCC Supreme Court Cases

UN United Nations

v Versus

vol. Volume

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | III

Page 17
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

ARTICLES & BOOKS

CITED AS FULL CITATION

Pavan Duggal, Cyber Law – An exhaustive section wise commentary

Pavan Duggal
on the Information Technology Act (3rd ed. 2023).

Dr. Jyoti Rattan Cyber Laws & Information Technology (9th ed. 2022).

Suresh T. The Indian Cyber Law with The Information Technology Act, 2000
Viswanathan (2022).

Surendra & Supreme Court on Information Technology Act, Internet & Cyber
Sudeep Malik Laws and Aadhaar (1st Ed., 2019).

Prashant Iyengar Prashant Iyengar, ‘Limits to Privacy — The Centre for Internet and
Society’ (The Centre for Internet & Society — The Centre for Internet
and Society, 6 May 2011), accessed 31 January 2024.

Bedavyasa Mohanty, ‘The Constitutionality of Indian Surveillance

Bedavyasa Mohanty Law: Public Emergency as a Condition Precedent for Intercepting
Communications — The Centre for Internet and Society’ (The Centre
for Internet & Society — The Centre for Internet and Society, 4 July
2014) accessed 31 January 2024.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | IV

Page 18
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

CONVENTIONS, RULES & STATUES

CITED AS FULL CITATION

COI 1950 The Constitution of India, 1950

IT Act The Information Technology Act, 200

Cr.P.C. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

IT Rules, 2011 Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines), Rules, 2011

IT Rules, 2009 Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception,

Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009

CASES CITED

1. Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra [1999] 1 SCC 759.

2. Chief Settlement Commissioner, Punjab v. Om Prakash [1968] 3 SCR 655.

3. A.T. Raghava Chariar v. O.M. Srinivasa Raghava Chariar, ILR (1916) 40 Mad
308.

4. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd. [2008] 13

SCC 30.

5. Facebook Inc v Union of India [2019] SCC OnLine SC 1269.

6. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Birendrabahadur Pandey [1984] 2 SCC

534.

7. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India [2017] 10 SCC 1.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | V

Page 19
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

8. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [1978] 1 SCC 248.

9. Miranda v. Arizona [1966] 384 U.S. 436.

10. Mirza Ali Akbar Kashani v. United Arab Republic [1966] 1 SCR 319.

11. Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2016] 7
SCC 353.

12. Mohun Bibi v. Saral Chand, 2 C.W.N. 18 (1897).

13. Nandini Sathpaty v. P.L. Danis [1978] 2 SCC 424.

14. Mahomad Said v. Bishambhar Nath, (1923) 45 All 633.

15. National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India [2014] 5 SCC 438.

16. Jagar Nath Singh v. Lalta Prasad, (1899) I.L.R. 25 Cal. 371.

17. Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [1962] 3 SCR 842.

18. Stocks v. Wilson, [1913] 2 KB 235.

19. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (UOI), [2015] 5 SCC 1 : AIR 2015 SC 1523.

20. Sherin V. John v. State of Kerala [2018] SCC OnLine Ker 2597.

21. State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad [1961] 2 Cri LJ 856.

22. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Baldeo Prasad [1961] 1 SCR 970.

23. Apple v. FBI.

24. Comm'n v. Austria, Case C-614/10, ECLI : EU : C : 2012 : 631

25. T.R. Appaswami Aiyangar vs Narayanaswami Aiyar, (1931) 60 MLJ 117.

26. Klass v. Federal Republic of Germany (Series A, NO 28) (1979-80) 2 EHRR 214).

27. Kuju Collieries Ltd. v. Jharkhand Mines Ltd, (1975) 1 SCR 703

28. Hira v. Jowala Das, AIR 1915 Lah 480

29. Bhure v. Sheogopal, AIR 1920 Nag 157

30. Jahed Shaikh v Kamalesh Chandra Das, AIR 1959 Cal 165

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VI

Page 20
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION]

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble High Supreme Court of Indica has the jurisdiction to try, entertain and dispose of
the present case by virtue of Article 32 of the Constitution of Indica.

“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 warrant 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
ill 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.”

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VII

Page 21
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF FACTS]

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Key Event

On 13 th of August 2022, at about 7:00 am, a family consisting of a husband, wife, and a minor
boy, on vacation, on the way to Sundarpur National Park, which is located at the Antartaka and
Aminadu borders, saw a high-end Trudi car stopped on the side of the State Highway No. 106.
They saw a body lying in a pool of blood on the road next to the car. r. The family informed
the highway police about the incident. The police arrived at the scene and identified the
deceased as Mr. Anand.

Conduct of Investigation

The police, in their inquiry, noted the vehicles passing through the Highway around the time
of Mr. Anand's death. They identified Mr. Ian and his new SUV, CG-Metron, as suspicious
because of his prolonged travel time compared to other vehicles. Mr. Ian was summoned for
police interrogation. Consequently, they confiscated Mr. Ian's car. The vehicle utilized an
automated system employing blockchain technology for data storage. The system could be
operated through the linked smartphone, belonging to Mr. Ian. The access to the car's data was
password-protected and could only be decrypted using the private key held by Mr. Ian.

Present Factual Scenario

Unable to decrypt the smartphone due to the non-cooperation of Mr. Ian and the car company,
the investigating authority invoked Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000. They sought digital forensic
experts' help to bypass the security. Attempts to hack into the smartphone and retrieve the key
proved futile due to an algorithm within the system that could alter data records if accessed
improperly. Police initiated legal proceedings against Mr. Ian for refusing to share the private
key. Simultaneously, the Head office of CG Car Company, along with other car manufacturers
producing autonomous cars in India, filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of Indica thus
leading to the present case.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VIII

Page 22
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ISSUES RAISED]

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE:1

WHETHER SECTION 69 OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 IS

CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID?

ISSUE:2

WHETHER GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL OVER THE USE OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC

TECHNIQUES IS TOO RESTRICTIVE IN NATURE?

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | IX

Page 23
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS]

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. SECTION 69 OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT IS NOT

CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID

It is hereby humbly submitted before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that Section 69 of
the legislation under consideration is unconstitutional on grounds that - Firstly, the contention
is rooted in the argument that the Union of India is duty-bound to uphold international
obligations, and the existence of Section 69 may contravene these commitments. Secondly, a
critical examination of Section 69 reveals a potential misuse of the provision. Rather than
serving as a necessary and proportionate tool for regulatory purposes, there is a discernible risk
that Section 69 might be wielded in a manner inconsistent with the principles of fairness and
due process. Thirdly, point of contention revolves around the language and clarity of the
provisions contained within Section 69. The text of the section is critiqued for its vagueness
and ambiguity, posing challenges in interpretation and application. The absence of clear
guidelines and well-defined parameters within the provision raises questions about its legal
certainty and conformity with fundamental principles of justice.

II. THE GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL OVER THE USE OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC

TECHNIQUES IS TOO RESTRICTIVE IN NATURE AND SHOULD BE
DISCONTINUED

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that governmental control over the use of
cryptographic techniques is too restrictive in nature and should thus be discontinued. Section
69 grants broad powers to government authorities to intercept, monitor, and decrypt
information stored in computer systems. The lack of precise guidelines regarding the
circumstances under which these powers can be exercised leads to potential misuse or
overreach.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | X

Page 24
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I. SECTION 69 OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT IS

NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID

¶ [1]. May it please the Hon’ble Justices of Supreme Court of Indica,

The Petitioner, CG Car Company & ors.,

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

That it is humbly submitted by the Petitioners that Section 69 of the Information Technology
Act, 2000 is unconstitutional. That this contention is substantiated in a threefold manner:

[A] THE UNION OF INDICA IS BOUND TO FOLLOW INTERNATIONAL

OBLIGATIONS

[B] SECTION 69 OF THE IT ACT IS VIOLATIVE OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY

[C] THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 OF THE IT ACT, 2000 ARE VAGUE AND
LACK CLARITY

A. THE UNION OF INDICA IS BOUND TO FOLLOW INTERNATIONAL

OBLIGATIONS

¶ [2]. That, the Petitioners would like to bring to the Hon’ble Court’s knowledge the fact that

the Union of Indica is duty-bound to uphold international obligations, and the existence of

Section 69 may contravene these commitments. To uphold its international commitments, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of Indica has extensively relied on international law, as long as it aligns

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 1

Page 25
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

with existing domestic legislation. As stipulated in the Constitution of Indica, the State is

directed to strive for respect for international law and treaty obligations in interactions between

organized people.1 Courts within the country are obliged to consider international conventions

and norms when interpreting domestic laws,2 especially in situations where no inconsistency

exists, and there is a gap in the domestic legal framework.3

¶ [3]. That Indica, as a member State of the United Nations, formally acceded to the

constitution on August 30, 1924. 4 This historical commitment paved the way for the

subsequent engagement with international legal frameworks. In a significant development, the

General Assembly of the United Nations passed resolution A/RES/51/162 on January 30, 1997,

endorsing the Model Law on Electronic Commerce, a document meticulously crafted by the

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. The resolution strongly encourages

all member States, including Indica, to give thoughtful consideration to incorporating this

Model Law into their domestic legal systems.5 The emphasis lies in achieving a uniform and

consistent legal landscape, particularly in matters pertaining to non-paper-based methods of

communication and information storage. The underlying objective is to promote the reliable

use of electronic records for enhancing the efficiency of government service delivery.6

¶ [4]. Aligning with the broader international context, the significance of privacy is

underscored by provisions such as Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

1
[2014] 5 SCC 438
2
[1969] 3 SCC 562
3
[1966] 1 SCR 319.
4
‘About Us’ (Member States | United Nations) <www.un.org/en/about-us/member-states> accessed 22 January
2024.
5
‘International standards’ (OHCHR) <www.ohchr.org/en/privacy-in-the-digital-age/international-standards>
accessed 5 January 2024.
6
Ibid
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 2

Page 26
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

('UDHR') and Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('ICCPR').

These articles unequivocally affirm the right of individuals to be shielded from arbitrary or

unlawful interference in their privacy, family, home, or correspondence. 7 Additionally, they

explicitly protect individuals from unjust attacks on their honor and reputation, reinforcing the

global commitment to safeguarding fundamental human rights.

¶ [5]. The escalating concerns surrounding digital privacy on a global scale prompted the

convening of the General Assembly of the United Nations, which commissioned a

comprehensive report titled ‘Right to Privacy in the Digital Age’.8 This meticulously crafted

report, prepared by the Office of the OHCHR, systematically examines the implications of

digital advancements on privacy rights, drawing insights from both the UDHR and the ICCPR.9

¶ [6]. In response to contemporary challenges in the digital landscape, the report specifically

calls upon member States to refrain from implementing measures that might compromise

encryption, including the imposition of backdoors enabling access to encrypted data and the

deployment of systematic screening methods like client-side scanning on individuals’

devices.10

¶ [7]. A critical observation highlighted in the report underscores the pervasive nature of digital

surveillance practices, emphasizing that governmental mass surveillance has transitioned from

7
Supra note 5.
8
United Nations, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Right to Privacy in the
Digital Age, A/HRC/27/37 (30 June 2014)
9
Ibid
10
General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Right (1966), 2200A (XXI), art XVII § 2
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 3

Page 27
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

an exceptional measure to a recurring and potentially intrusive habit across jurisdictions

worldwide.11

¶ [8]. In a consequential development, General Resolution 68/167 was adopted, presenting a

set of comprehensive guidelines for the protection and recognition of ‘The Right to Privacy in

the Digital Age’. These guidelines encompass a series of imperative calls to member States,

urging them to uphold and safeguard the right to privacy in the context of digital

communication.12 Key directives include addressing privacy violations, undertaking a critical

review of existing laws and procedures pertaining to privacy, establishing effective domestic

systems for tracking digital communications only when necessary, and enhancing transparency

in situations where privacy constraints are deemed essential for the greater good.13

B. SECTION 69 OF THE IT ACT IS VIOLATIVE OF THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY

¶ [9]. That Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000 potentially violates the inherent right to privacy, a

fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of Indica. The authority

conferred by Section 69 empowers the interception, monitoring, and decryption of private

communications and sensitive information without explicit consent or judicial oversight. This

unrestricted power encroaches upon the digital privacy of individuals in their interactions.

¶ [10]. The demand for the accused to decrypt data stored on their mobile phone equates to

compelling the revelation of personal information. Even if such data pertains to the alleged

11
United Nations, The right to privacy in the digital age (A/HRC/51/17, United Nations General Assembly 2022)
12
Resolution 68/167 (2013), A//RES/68/167.
13
Ibid
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 4

Page 28
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

offense, the accused is entitled to refuse, as outlined under Section 161(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure. This provision reinforces an individual's right to withhold self-

incriminating information.

¶ [11]. Referencing the landmark decision in the State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad14 case,

the definition of "to be a witness" is elucidated. It denotes the communication of knowledge

about relevant facts by an individual possessing personal knowledge. This underscores the

significance of first-hand knowledge in providing testimony during legal proceedings or

investigations.

¶ [12]. The globally acknowledged principle of the right to remain silent during investigations

is underscored by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona15. This principle,

applied universally, has also found resonance in the jurisprudence of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court of Indica, exemplified by the case of Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani16. It accentuates the

importance of an accused person's right to maintain silence as a fundamental aspect of the

investigative process.

¶ [13]. Section 45-A of the Evidence Act exclusively deals with the pertinence of the opinion

provided by the examiner of Electronic Evidence in accordance with the specifications outlined

in Section 79-A of the Act. However, it is noteworthy that these legal provisions do not

explicitly address the potential impact on fundamental rights, specifically those enshrined in

Article 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. In particular, the omission is evident concerning the

14
AIR [1961] SC 1808.
15
[1966] 384 U.S. 436.
16
[1978] 2 SCC 424.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 5

Page 29
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

Right to Privacy, a fundamental right safeguarded under Article 21 of the Constitution. This

lack of specific consideration raises important questions regarding the alignment of legal

provisions with constitutional protections, especially in the context of evolving challenges

posed by electronic evidence and its potential impact on individual rights.

C. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 69 OF THE IT ACT, 2000 ARE VAGUE AND

LACK CLARITY

¶ [14]. The petitioners assert that the provisions embedded in Section 69 exhibit a notable

deficiency in clarity and precision, rendering them vague and ambiguous. The ambiguity

pertains specifically to the circumstances governing the government's authorization for

interception, monitoring, and decryption. This lack of specificity raises legitimate concerns

about the potential for abuse and misuse of these powers, creating a risk of undermining

fundamental principles of due process and fairness. While acknowledging the imperative for

law enforcement to access vital information, the petitioners advocate for a more transparent

and accountable process that is subject to judicial scrutiny. They contend that such a framework

is essential to striking a delicate balance between the exigencies of investigations and the

protection of individual rights.

¶ [15].That the Supreme Court of Indica, in the case of Facebook Inc. v Union of India17,

articulated a significant perspective on decryption. The Court highlighted that the unrestricted

availability of decryption tools could pose a threat to fundamental rights and stressed the

importance of deploying such tools only in special circumstances. The Court's stance

underscored the need to exercise caution and restraint in utilizing decryption methods to ensure

17
[2019] SCC OnLine SC 1269.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 6

Page 30
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

the preservation of an individual's privacy. This position resonates with the broader notion that

the application of decryption should be circumscribed and judicious, particularly in light of the

potential impact on fundamental rights.

¶ [16]. The petitioners submit that Section 69 of the IT Act does not meet the criteria of a

reasonable restriction on the Right to Privacy, as per the threefold test of legality, necessity,

and proportionality established in the case of K.S Puttaswamy v. Union of India18.

16.1. The legality of Section 69 of the IT Act is called into question as it does not align with

established standards:

16.1.1. The contention is that Section 69 runs afoul of the test of legality, given the inherent

limitations placed on the Right to Privacy, subject to reasonable restraints.19 The exhaustive

and narrowly construed grounds for restrictions enumerated in Article 19(2)-(6) further

emphasize the stringent interpretation required.20

16.1.2. Going beyond the permissible restrictions outlined in Article 19(2) of the

Constitution of Indica, Section 69 introduces expansive grounds such as 'defence of Indica'

and 'investigation of any offence,' thereby broadening the scope of government

interception.21

18
[2017] 10 SCC 1.
19
Ibid
20
[1962] SC 305 (315)
21
Alekhya Sattigeri, ‘Gauging The Constitutionality Of S. 69 Of The IT Act Vis-À-Vis Test Of Proportionality
Laid Down In KS Puttaswamy’ (Supreme Court News, Latest India Legal News, Judgments, Law Firms News,
Latest Legal News, 10 April 2021)
<www.livelaw.in/columns/information-technology-act-2000-ks-puttaswamy-fundamental-rights-
172407?infinitescroll=1> accessed 25 January 2024.
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 7

Page 31
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

16.1.3. The provision's allocation of arbitrary powers to the Central Government and

executive authority is highlighted, portraying Section 69 as an unjust, unfair, and

unreasonable measure that violates the foundational condition of legality.22

16.2 Section 69 of the IT Act does not meet the criterion of necessity, falling short in

demonstrating a legitimate State aim for the imposed restrictions.

16.2.1. The assertion is that Section 69 lacks the necessary elements. The necessity

criterion, which ties the imposition of restrictions to a legitimate State aim, is designed to

ensure that the law remains within the bounds of reasonableness and is devoid of manifest

arbitrariness.

16.2.2. The terms 'defence of State' and 'investigation of any offence,' the grounds for

interception orders under Section 69 of the IT Act, lack explicit definitions by the

legislature or the judiciary. This absence of clarity delegates the determination of these

grounds solely to the Executive, endowing it with arbitrary powers to issue communication

interception orders, potentially infringing upon the principles outlined in Article 14.23

16.2.3. In the specific instance under consideration, the forceful request for decryption

under Section 69 lacks specification regarding grounds or purpose. This deficiency renders

the information-seeking process inherently flawed and arbitrary. Moreover, the notice

issued to manufacturers through official channels is critiqued for its lack of transparency

and logical reasoning.

22
[1968] 3 SCR 655
23
Bedavyasa Mohanty, ‘The Constitutionality of Indian Surveillance Law: Public Emergency as a Condition
Precedent for Intercepting Communications — The Centre for Internet and Society’ (The Centre for Internet &
Society — The Centre for Internet and Society, 4 July 2014) <https://editors.cis-india.org/internet-
governance/blog/the-constitutionality-of-indian-surveillance-law> accessed 26 January 2024
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 8

Page 32
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

16.2.4. The absolute discretion granted to the Executive by Section 69 is deemed manifestly

arbitrary. The absence of an independent, impartial reviewing authority further compounds

the issue, rendering both the impugned section and actions taken under it as constitutionally

questionable.

16.3 In light of the case Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya

Pradesh24

16.3.1. The argument posits that Section 69 is incompatible with the Proportionality test

outlined in Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh. This

test stipulates that a measure restricting a right must align with a legitimate goal, employ

suitable means, lack less restrictive alternatives, and not disproportionately impact the

right-holder.

16.3.2. The provision lacks clarity in interpreting the mentioned grounds,

disproportionately affecting citizens' rights by conferring unchecked power to the

executive, granting them unrestrained discretion.25

16.3.3. The powers bestowed under Section 69 are deemed disproportionate to the

legitimate aim of safeguarding national security. The broad and sweeping nature of these

powers raises concerns about potential indiscriminate surveillance on citizens without

reasonable justification, challenging the principles of proportionality.

16.3.4. The provision mandates the Authority to possess decryption keys, creating a

potential for misuse and subjecting individuals to mass surveillance without procedural

24
[2016] 7 SCC 353.
25
[1961] 1 SCR 970.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 9

Page 33
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

safeguards. This practice infringes on privacy rights intrusively, allowing authorities

unrestricted access to information at any time.

16.3.5. The procedure outlined in the provision must adhere to principles of justice,

fairness, and reasonableness, as established by the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi v.

Union of India26. It emphasizes that any procedure regulating fundamental rights must be

fair, not arbitrary, and designed to uphold, not undermine, the substantive right itself.

16.3.6. The cumulative argument suggests that Section 69 of the IT Act contradicts the right

to privacy by failing the Proportionality test. Consequently, it is contended that the

provision should be deemed unconstitutional, thereby nullifying the government's actions.

¶ [17]. It is contended that Section 69 fails to meet the requirements of the Proportionality test,

as delineated in Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh. This

legal precedent establishes that a measure restricting a right must fulfil specific criteria: it

should serve a legitimate goal, employ suitable means to achieve this goal, lack equally

effective alternatives that are less restrictive, and not impose a disproportionate impact on the

right-holder.

¶ [18]. The impugned provision suffers from a lack of clarity in defining its grounds, resulting

in a significant and disproportionate impact on citizens' rights. By conferring unrestricted

power to the executive and providing them with unchecked discretion, the provision raises

concerns about its potential overreach and disproportionate influence on individual rights.

26
[1978] 1 SCC 248
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 10

Page 34
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [19]. CONCLUSION TO THE FIRST ISSUE: In the present case, the requirement for the

Authority to possess decryption keys, coupled with the obligation to share these keys with the

Government upon demand, poses a significant risk. The potential disclosure of encrypted data

without procedural safeguards could lead to mass surveillance, infringing upon individual

privacy rights in a manner that is both intrusive and constitutionally questionable.

II. GOVERNMENT CONTROL OVER THE USE OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC TECHNIQUES IS TOO

RESTRICTIVE IN NATURE

¶ [20]. It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indica that governmental
control over the use of cryptographic techniques is too restrictive in nature and should thus be
discontinued.

That this contention is substantiated in a twofold manner:

[A] THE MANDATED SHARING OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC TECHNIQUES WITH

GOVERNMENT ENTITIES JEOPARDIZES INNOVATION AND FOREIGN
INVESTMENT

[B] DECRYPTION OF DATA AFFECTS CREDIBILITY AND BREACHES TRUST

OF CONSUMERS

A. THE MANDATED SHARING OF CRYPTOGRAPHIC TECHNIQUES WITH

GOVERNMENT ENTITIES JEOPARDIZES INNOVATION AND FOREIGN
INVESTMENT

¶ [21]. The Counsel for the petitioner contends, with due respect to the Hon’ble Supreme Court

that Section 69 grants broad powers to government authorities to intercept, monitor, and

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 11

Page 35
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

decrypt information stored in computer systems. The lack of precise guidelines regarding the

circumstances under which these powers can be exercised leads to potential misuse or

overreach.

¶ [22]. The CG Car Company and other autonomous vehicle makers strongly argue that Section

69 of the IT Act infringes upon their basic rights under Article 19(1)(g) and poses a serious

threat to their business interests. The demand for the required disclosure of the cryptographic

methods used in their cars is seen as excessively restrictive and harmful to their business.

¶ [23]. It is argued before the Hon'ble Court is that "a restriction must be narrowly tailored or

narrowly interpreted so as to abridge or restrict only what is absolutely necessary in order for

it to be reasonable."27 The justifications specified in Section 69 are incredibly broad, open-

ended, and prone to the Government's subjective interpretations. They are also not defined

anywhere in the Act. As a result, it grants the central government unlimited discretionary power

to limit people's right to privacy.

¶ [24]. The core argument revolves around the adverse impact of this provision on the

competitive edge and market perception of their products. These companies assert that their

clientele highly values the robust security features integrated into their autonomous cars. The

mandated sharing of cryptographic techniques with government entities, directly jeopardizes

the trust and confidence that customers place in the security measures of these vehicles. The

Section is therefore in violation of Art 19(1)(g) as it is too restrictive and affects their

competition strategies in the potential market.

27
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (UOI), (2015) 5 SCC 1: AIR 2015 SC 1523.
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 12

Page 36
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [25]. In the case of Sherin V. John v. State of Kerala, the Court held that, when there is a

conflict between fundamental rights of a person and statutory rights of another person,

fundamental rights will prevail.28

¶ [26]. Moreover, the consequences go beyond a simple inconvenience for business. There is

a contention that this law has the potential to significantly disrupt Indica's rapidly growing

autonomous vehicle market. The promise of state-of-the-art security measures is crucial to

these cars' marketability and reputation. The publication of these secret processes, if

compromised, might potentially discourage future consumers and investors.

¶ [27]. The automotive industry thrives on innovation and technological advancements,

especially in the realm of autonomous vehicles. Imposing stringent measures like compulsory

cryptographic disclosure not only stifles innovation but also dissuades international

manufacturers from investing in Indica's market. This, in turn, could impede the nation's

progress in becoming a global hub for autonomous vehicle technology.

¶ [28]. Moreover, the CG Car Company and its counterparts argue that compliance with such

mandates may necessitate altering their product design and security infrastructure. This could

lead to increased costs of compliance and potential delays in product development cycles,

further hampering their competitive stance in the market.

¶ [29]. In essence, these companies stress that while acknowledging the necessity for national

security measures, a balanced approach is imperative. They urge for a reconsideration of

Section 69 to ensure that the regulatory framework promotes both security interests and the

28
[2018] SCC OnLine Ker 2597.
INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 13

Page 37
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

growth of the autonomous vehicle industry in Indica without undermining the innovative

strides made in securing these advanced technologies.

¶ [30]. Further, the Petitioners would like to submit Indica is a member of the WTO, since

1995, and by virtue of the same Indica is also a member of the General Agreement on Trade in

Services. The GATS has a ‘Member's Schedule’, by virtue of which any member listed therein

(including Indica) are obliged to open their market to the access of new services from other

countries, without creating any restriction. The GATS recognises certain general exceptions,

which countries must avoid in order to provide a service and under Article XIV(c)(ii) of the

GATS it is stated that countries must secure laws that serve, ‘the protection of the privacy of

individuals in relation to the processing and dissemination of personal data and the protection

of confidentiality of individual records and accounts.29 This could effectively be translated into

an obligation to create laws that protect the privacy of data.

B. DECRYPTION OF DATA AFFECTS CREDIBILITY AND BREACHES TRUST

OF CONSUMERS

¶ [31]. In the current digital era, customers' top priority is data protection. When a business

states clearly that one of its product's features is data privacy, customers take this as a promise

to protect their private information. This raises expectations that the business will put

customers' interests first. Gaining a competitive edge in the market by positioning data

protection is a unique feature. Additionally, the petitioner has used this as a selling point to

29
Diane A MacDonald and Christine M Streatfeild, Id, at 638; General Agreement on Trade in Services, Uruguay
Round Agreement, 1995, art XIV(c)(ii).

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 14

Page 38
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

draw clients who value confidentiality and privacy. In order to protect user data security and

confidentiality, there is an ethical obligation. When the business is compelled to provide the

government with the data in every instance of an offense, it won't be able to fulfil its

accountability for data protection, which undermines its credibility because it deprives

customers of a crucial benefit that it offers.

¶ [32]. When the company fails to uphold this trust, it not only breaches that specific trust but

also damages the broader trust consumers have in such intermediaries. Also, the company will

be liable under S. 72 of IT Act for breach of confidentiality and privacy if the company will be

forced to decrypt the data to the government. Companies often establish privacy policies, which

form a binding contract with users. These policies promise certain levels of data protection and

confidentiality. Forced decryption may conflict with these policies, raising concerns about

legal compliance with the terms agreed.

¶ [33]. It is humbly contended that “The emphasis still lies on the absence of judicial

oversight. 30 ” The European Court of Human Rights held, “In an area where abuse is

theoretically so simple in specific instances and might have such negative effects for

democratic society as a whole, it is in theory desirable to commit general supervision to a

court.”31

33.1. Breach of contract

33.1.1. The terms of service and privacy policies of the vehicle company frequently

contain the contractual duties between the company and its consumers. Given that S.

30
Comm'n v. Austria, Case C-614/10, ECLI : EU : C : 2012 : 631.
31
Klass v. Federal Republic of Germany, (Series A, NO 28) (1979-80) 2 EHRR 214).

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 15

Page 39
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

69 itself contains ambiguity and the petitioner has asserted the unique feature of an

advanced data protection system, disclosing this information to the government would

constitute a breach of contract between the petitioner and its clients.

33.1.2. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of Indica released a report on the

‘Recommendations on Regulatory Framework for Over-The-Top Communication

Services’. The report stated that no regulatory interventions are necessary to deal with

the privacy and security of OTT platforms, yet the Report has not ruled out the

possibility of regulatory intervention, rather it has stated that an intervention might be

done at a later “appropriate” stage of time.32

33.2. Violation of Privacy

33.2.1. The counsel humbly submits that insisting the Petitioner to assist in unlocking

the smartphone, which contains personal information of the user is violative of ‘Right

to Privacy’ as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mr. Justice K.S.

Puttaswamy.

“…The nine primary types of privacy are, according to the above depiction:

…(iii) communicational privacy which is reflected in enabling an individual to

restrict access to communications or control the use of information which is

communicated to third parties; …(ix) informational privacy which reflects an

32
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, ‘Recommendations on Regulatory Framework for Over-The-Top (OTT)
Communication Services’ (2020) <https://trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/Recommendation_14092020_0.pdf>
accessed 31 January 2024.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 16

Page 40
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

interest in preventing information about the self from being disseminated and

controlling the extent of access to information.

33.2.2. There is no specific law, enabling the taking away his right to privacy, or for a

direction to be given by any court, either to give password of his mobile or to unlock

the same and further to use the data contained in his mobile for the purpose of

investigation. Since the right to privacy is recognised as a fundamental right under

Article 21 of the Constitution, to take away this fundamental right, even of an accused,

there must be a law enacted by Parliament and the Law must meet the test of Article 21

as laid down in Maneka Gandhi's case i.e., it must be just, fair and reasonable not

illusory.

33.2.3. It is pertinent to note that National interests may override individual privacy,

but the threshold should be high, as Justice Srikrishna Committee noted, “to ensure that

the pillars of the data protection framework are not shaken by a vague and nebulous

national security exception.33”

¶ [34]. CONCLUSION TO THE SECOND ISSUE: To conclude, it is thereby contended that the

governmental intervention with the cyber security standards under S. 69 of the Act is too

restrictive in nature as it fails to provide proper guidelines for the invocation of the said section.

The fact that there was an algorithm within the system that was capable of altering the data

record if accessed using any means other than the provided security method is a proof that the

petitioner car company is adhering to the regulations on information and cyber security, to

33
Renjith Mathew, ‘Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 - Examined through the Prism of Fundamental Right to
privacy - A Critical Study’ SCC Online (22 May 2020) accessed 31 January 2024.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 17

Page 41
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

mitigate the possible cyber threats. Thus, the stand taken by the petitioner for not providing

any assistance to the authorities because it was against the security offered by them to the

customers is justified.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 18

Page 42
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced, and

authorities cited, may this Hon’ble Court be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

A. Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is not constitutionally valid.

B. The governmental control over the use of cryptographic techniques is too restrictive in

nature and should be discontinued.

And /Or, Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity, and

good conscience.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

PLACE: Delhi sd/-

DATE: 02/02/2024 COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 19

Page 43
IV. MOOT COURT EXERCISE 2

Page 44
 TEAM CODE: TC01

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH VIDULA

Under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indica

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

PEOPLE FOR THE EDUCATION AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN … Petitioner

V.

STATE OF SOUTH VIDULA …Respondent

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

Page 45
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [TABLE OF CONTENTS]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS ...........................................................................................II

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................................III

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...................................................................................IV

STATEMENT OF FACTS ....................................................................................................V

ISSUES RAISED .................................................................................................................VII

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS .......................................................................................VIII

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED .................................................................................................1

1. WHETHER THE PETITION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE HON’BLE
HIGH COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?.....................................................................................1
2. WHETHER THE DETERMINATION OF JUVENILITY BE CONTINGENT UPON THE SEVERITY AND
TYPE OF OFFENSE COMMITTED, CONSIDERING THAT MANY JUVENILES ARE INVOLVED IN

SERIOUS CRIMES?.............................................................................................................3

3. WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE & PROTECTION OF

CHILDREN) ACT, 2012 CLASSIFYING AMONG JUVENILES ARE WITHIN THE AMBIT OF

CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PROVISIONS……………………………………6

PRAYER .................................................................................................................................11

I|Page

Page 46
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

¶/¶¶ Paragraph/Paragraphs

& And

AIR All India Reporter

Cr. LJ Criminal Law Journal

Govt. Government

Art. Article

i.e That is

Honourable
Hon’ble

JJ Juvenile Justice

NCT Others

p./pp. Page/Pages

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

v Versus

II | P a g e

Page 47
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

CONVENTIONS, RULES & STATUES

COI The Constitution of India, 1950

IEA, 1872 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Cr.P.C. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

VPC The Vidula Penal Code, 1860

JJ Act, 2012 The Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2012

CASES CITED

1. Arnit Das v. State of Bihar - AIR 2000 SC 2264.

2. Bhoop Ram v. State of UP - AIR 1987 SC 1329.

3. Jayendra v. State of UP - AIR 1982 SC 685.

4. Munna v. State of UP - AIR 1982 SC 806

5. Nirbhaya case [Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2017) 6 SCC 1 :(2017) 2 SCC
(Cri) 673].

6. Raj Singh v. State of Haryana - 2000 (6) SCC 759

7. Radhika (Juvenile) vs State Of U.P. on 5 August, 2019.

8. Sanjay Suri v. Delhi Administration - AIR 1986 SC 414.

9. Salil Bali Vs Union Of India, (2013) 7 SCC 705

III | P a g e

Page 48
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION]

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Petitioners have approached the Hon’ble High Court of South Vidula under Article 226
& 227 of the Constitution of Vidula. The Respondent humbly submits to the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble Court.

Article 226 reads as under:

“226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs
(1) Notwithstanding anything in article 32 every High Court shall have powers,
throughout the territories in relation to which it exercise jurisdiction, to issue to any
person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those
territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus,
mandamus, prohibition, quo warrantor and certiorari, or any of them, for the
enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.”

Article 227(1) reads as under:

227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court
(1) Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals
throughout the territories interrelation to which it exercises jurisdiction.

IV | P a g e

Page 49
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [STATEMENT OF FACTS]

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The enactment of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2012 by the
Government of Vidula is constitutionally valid, aligning with the fundamental principles
enshrined in the Constitution of Vidula. This legislation reflects the state’s commitment to
protecting vulnerable youth and addressing the increasing crime rate among adolescents.
The Act provides a comprehensive framework for dealing with children in conflict with
the law and those in need of care, emphasizing rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
It is consistent with the constitutional mandate to safeguard the rights and welfare of
children.

2. The decision of the Juvenile Justice Board to determine the eligibility of the accused boys
to be tried as adults was based on objective criteria and expert evaluation. Eminent
psychologists and psychiatrists were involved in assessing the mental capacity and
culpability of the boys, ensuring a fair and thorough examination of their circumstances.
The Board’s determination was not influenced by public sentiment but grounded in the
provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and established psychological principles. It aimed to
ensure accountability while considering the rehabilitative needs of the juveniles.

3. Contrary to the petitioner’s assertions, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2012 is not in violation of international standards, including the UN
Declaration on the Rights of the Child. The Act prioritizes the best interests of the child
and emphasizes measures for their protection and well-being. Vidula, as a signatory to
international conventions, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child, is
committed to upholding the rights of children within its jurisdiction. The Juvenile Justice
Act reflects this commitment by providing a legal framework that balances accountability
with the principles of juvenile justice.

4. The legal proceedings conducted in the present case adhered to established legal principles
and precedents, ensuring procedural fairness and due process. The Sessions court’s verdict
was based on the evidence presented before it and the applicable provisions of law. The
decision to try Amar as an adult and the three boys as juveniles was made in accordance
with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and the principles of criminal jurisprudence.

V|Page

Page 50
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [STATEMENT OF FACTS]

It reflects a balanced approach to justice, taking into account the individual circumstances
of each accused.

5. The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by PEPC seeks to challenge the constitutionality
of the Juvenile Justice Act and the proceedings conducted therein. However, it is essential
to uphold the independence of the judiciary and respect the decisions made by competent
legal authorities. The High Court of South Vidula, in hearing the PIL, must exercise
judicial restraint and uphold the constitutionality of legislative enactments unless clear
grounds for unconstitutionality are demonstrated. The judiciary’s role is to interpret the
law and safeguard constitutional rights while respecting the separation of powers.

6. The State of South Vidula maintains that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2012 is constitutionally valid and serves the best interests of children in
conflict with the law. The legal proceedings conducted in the present case were fair,
transparent, and in compliance with established legal principles. Any challenge to the Act’s
validity must be based on substantive legal grounds, rather than subjective interpretations
or public sentiment.

VI | P a g e

Page 51
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ISSUES RAISED]

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE:1

WHETHER THE PETITION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE

HON’BLE HIGH COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?

ISSUE:2

WHETHER THE DETERMINATION OF JUVENILITY BE CONTINGENT UPON THE

SEVERITY AND TYPE OF OFFENSE COMMITTED, CONSIDERING THAT MANY

JUVENILES ARE INVOLVED IN SERIOUS CRIMES?

ISSUE:3

WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE & PROTECTION OF

CHILDREN) ACT,2012 CLASSIFYING AMONG JUVENILES ARE WITHIN THE AMBIT OF

CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PROVISIONS?

VII | P a g e

Page 52
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS]

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. Whether the petition in the present case is maintainable before the Hon’ble High
Court is maintainable?

The petition filed in the Hon’ble High Court is not maintainable as: firstly, there existed an
efficacious alternative remedy and secondly, it is not maintainable on account of non-
contravention of any fundamental right. In the present case accused where tried in accordance
to the provisions of law and when found guilty were sentenced as per the provisions Juvenile
Justice and Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter of the petition is ineligible to be tried by
the High Court as there has been no injustice being served by the lower courts.

II. Whether the juvenility will depend upon the nature of offence committed as in the
existing scenario as most of the juveniles are engaged in horrendous and heinous
crimes?
The juvenility should not depend on the nature of offence committed as in the present case:
firstly, there is no ambiguous meaning in the different provisions of the Juvenile Justice
Act,2012. Secondly, the act is not violative of any Constitutional or Criminal Law Provisions
and thirdly, the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility is fixed and is in consonance with
the International Commitments

III. Whether the Provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection Of Children)
Act, 2012 classifying among Juveniles are within the ambit of Constitutional and
International Provisions?
Punishing the child in conflict with law is the failure of the society at large in providing the
child with adequate care and protection, and by creating a fictional classification between the
children belonging to age group of 12-18 years on the basis of degree of crime "allegedly"
committed by them would abandon the conventions entered by India instead of sticking to it.
The Act is in consonance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which is a
comprehensive and internationally binding agreement on the rights of children. There is a steep

VIII | P a g e

Page 53
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS]

rise in heinous crime rates by these category of juveniles and several nations like U.K, U.S.A
have adopted this stricter policy to check these crimes. The provisions of Juveniles Justice Act
are within the ambit of the constitution provisions and international conventions and hence are
valid.

IX | P a g e

Page 54
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I. THE PETITION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE BEFORE HON’BLE HIGH COURT

¶ [1]. May it please the Hon’ble Justices of High Court of South Vidula,

The Petitioner, People for the education and protection of children.,

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

¶ [2]. That it is humbly submitted by the Petitioners that the petition in not maitainable:

¶ [3]. The present petition, filed by People for the Education and Protection of Children

(PEPC), seeks to challenge the validity of the Juvenile Justice Act before this Hon’ble High

Court of Vidula. However, it is respectfully submitted that the petition lacks maintainability

due to several compelling reasons, as elaborated below. Constitutional Validity of Juvenile

Justice Act

¶ [4]. The constitutional validity of the Juvenile Justice Act was unequivocally upheld by the

judiciary in the landmark case of Salil Bali v. Union of India1. This seminal legal precedent not

only affirmed the constitutionality of the Act but also emphasized its alignment with the

fundamental principles enshrined within the Constitution. The Act, being well within the ambit

of constitutional provisions, has withstood legal scrutiny and stands as a bulwark for the

protection and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. Therefore, any challenge to its validity lacks

legal basis and cannot be deemed maintainable before this Hon’ble High Court.

1
(2013) 7 SCC 705.

1|Page

Page 55
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [5]. In the light of the case J.J. Publications v. Union of India2, the Hon’ble court dealt with

issues related to judicial review and the scope of Article 226 of the Indian Constitution3. It

provides insights into the principles of maintainability of petitions before the High Courts. Trial

Proceedings in Accordance with Legal Provisions

¶ [6]. In the matter at hand, it is imperative to underscore that the accused were subjected to

trial proceedings conducted meticulously in accordance with the provisions delineated within

both the Juvenile Justice Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure. This adherence to legal

frameworks ensured that justice was duly served, affording the accused their rightful

entitlements under the law. The trial, conducted with procedural fairness and adherence to due

process, reflects the efficacy of the existing legal mechanisms in addressing juvenile offenses.

Consequently, in the absence of any discernible miscarriage of justice or procedural

irregularity, the intervention of this Hon’ble High Court is unwarranted.

¶ [7]. In the light of the case Rattan Lal v. State of Haryana 4 the hon’ble concerns the

interpretation of statutory provisions and the principles of procedural fairness. It probes into

the importance of adherence to legal frameworks in trial proceedings. Absence of Exceptional

Circumstances

¶ [8]. Crucially, the petition fails to demonstrate any exceptional or extraordinary

circumstances warranting the attention of this Hon’ble High Court. The legal landscape

governing matters related to minors, including the Juvenile Justice Act, is characterized by

clarity and precision, leaving little room for ambiguity or interpretation. Furthermore, Indian

jurisprudence, as elucidated in numerous judicial pronouncements, underscores the cardinal

2
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 76 OF 2016.
3
Art. 226, Indian Const.
4
1985 SCR SUPL. (2) 569.

2|Page

Page 56
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

principle that the powers vested in this Hon’ble High Court under Article 226 of the

Constitution ought to be exercised sparingly and judiciously, and reserved for cases where

substantial injustice or violation of fundamental rights is manifest.

¶ [9]. The arguments advanced herein, it is imperative to cite and elucidate upon relevant Indian

case laws and statutory provisions. The judicial pronouncements rendered in cases such as Salil

Bali v. Union of India and other seminal judgments not only reaffirm the constitutional validity

of the Juvenile Justice Act but also underscore the imperative of adhering to established legal

procedures and principles.5

¶ [10]. It is respectfully submitted that the petition filed by the Petitioners lacks maintainability

before this Hon’ble High Court. The absence of exceptional circumstances, coupled with the

constitutional validity of the Juvenile Justice Act and the adherence to procedural fairness in

the trial process, collectively militate against the merits of the petition. Consequently, it is

urged that this Hon’ble High Court dismiss the petition forthwith, thereby preserving the

sanctity of legal principles and conserving the invaluable time and resources of the judiciary.

II. THE DETERMINATION OF JUVENILITY SHOULD NOT BE CONTINGENT

UPON THE SEVERITY AND TYPE OF OFFENSE COMMITTED, CONSIDERING
THAT MANY JUVENILES ARE INVOLVED IN SERIOUS CRIMES

¶ [11]. The legislative adoption of 18 years as the threshold between juveniles and adults stands

as a constitutionally permissible decision, thereby necessitating the cessation of further inquiry

from the courts. This age delineation holds paramount significance in safeguarding the interests

of juveniles from criminal liability under the Vidula Penal Code. The undisputed age of 18

5
Salil Bali v. Union of India, (2013) 7 SCC 705.

3|Page

Page 57
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

years for the juvenile in question underscores the constitutional relevance of this threshold in

the context of juvenile justice.

¶ [12]. In instances where a juvenile, aged sixteen years or above, is implicated in a heinous

offense, the Juvenile Justice Board is tasked with conducting a preliminary assessment. This

assessment delves into various aspects such as the juvenile’s mental and physical capacity to

commit the offense, their comprehension of its consequences, and the circumstances

surrounding its commission. Such assessments serve to ensure a nuanced understanding of the

juvenile’s culpability and capacity for rehabilitation. Judicial Restraint and Legislative

Primacy.

¶ [13]. The principle of judicial restraint, as elucidated in the landmark case of State of Tamil

Nadu v. Shyam Sunder, underscores the inherent duty of the legislature in law making. Courts

are enjoined from unduly encroaching upon the domain of legislative prerogative. The

judiciary’s role is limited to upholding constitutional principles and fundamental rights,

without trespassing into the legislative realm. Any challenge to the validity of legislative

enactments must be predicated upon a clear demonstration of fundamental rights infringement.

¶ [14]. It is contended that the involvement of the accused in multiple cases of robbery and

drug-related offenses, as evidenced by police records, underscores the interplay between the

nature of the offense and the determination of juvenility. The gravity and severity of the

offenses committed by the accused necessitate a nuanced examination of their culpability and

maturity. While age serves as a foundational factor, the nature and circumstances of the offense

must also be considered in determining juvenility.

4|Page

Page 58
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [15]. In light of the case Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh6 the hon’ble court clarified the concept

of judicial restraint and the limitations of judicial intervention in legislative matters. It provides

guidance on when courts should exercise restraint and defer to legislative decisions. Role of

Law in Justice Administration

¶ [16]. Laws are regarded as instruments of justice, designed to uphold societal values and

ensure fairness in the administration of justice. However, they cannot be predicated solely on

isolated instances or impulsive reactions. The judiciary bears the onus of ensuring that legal

frameworks are conducive to the principles of equity, fairness, and rehabilitation. In assessing

juvenility, the court must interrogate whether the prevailing legal standards align with

principles of good law and justice.

¶ [17]. Determination of juvenility necessitates a holistic approach that takes into account both

statutory provisions and constitutional principles. The threshold age of 18 years serves as a

pivotal demarcation, while factors such as the nature of the offense and the juvenile’s

circumstances warrant nuanced consideration. Upholding the principles of judicial restraint

and legislative primacy, while ensuring the administration of justice guided by equitable laws,

remains paramount. Therefore, it is urged that the court adopts a balanced approach in

adjudicating matters pertaining to juvenility, upholding both the letter and spirit of the law.

6
(1988) 4 SCC 551.

5|Page

Page 59
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

III) WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE &

PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT,2012 CLASSIFYING AMONG JUVENILES
ARE WITHIN THE AMBIT OF CONSTITUTIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
PROVISIONS?

¶ [18]. It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of South Vidula provisions of

the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2012 classifying among juveniles are

within the ambit of constitutional and international provisions.

i) The Constitutional Validity of the Juvenile Justice Act in Vidula:

¶ [19]. The preamble of the Vidula Constitution emphasizes the protection of children, aligning

with the Indian Constitution's principles. Both Vidula and India enacted laws in 2012 to address

the increasing crime among youth, reflecting a shared concern for the welfare of children. The

Juvenile Justice Act in Vidula, like its Indian counterpart, seeks to protect children in need of

care and address children in conflict with the law.

¶ [20]. The dual purpose of the legislation reflects a comprehensive approach to dealing with

juveniles, emphasizing rehabilitation and protection.

¶ [21]. Amar, Akbar, Anthony, and Surjeet come from challenging backgrounds, lacking stable

family structures or facing abusive conditions. Their socio-economic circumstances

contributed to their vulnerability, reinforcing the need for a nuanced approach in the justice

system.

¶ [22]. The narrative of the "Baccha Gang" highlights the influence of the environment on their

actions. The boys grew up in tough conditions, leading to their engagement in criminal

activities.Acknowledging their troubled past is crucial for understanding the factors

contributing to their criminal behavior.

6|Page

Page 60
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [23]. The provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2012, in Vidula, are designed to rehabilitate

juveniles effectively. The Act recognizes the need for tailored interventions, especially for

juveniles like Amar, Akbar, Anthony, and Surjeet, who have faced challenges from a young

age.

¶ [24]. Amar, being over 18 at the time of the offense, falls outside the age bracket covered by

the Juvenile Justice Act, 2012, and is appropriately tried as an adult. The Act's age-based

criteria reflect a balance between recognizing maturity levels and providing rehabilitation

opportunities for younger offenders.

¶ [25]. Amar's involvement in the murder of Sam demands a higher level of accountability,

considering the severity of the crime. Trying Amar as an adult aligns with the Act's objective

of ensuring justice while recognizing the seriousness of the offense.

¶ [26]. Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2012, draws a reasonable and constitutionally

sound line between juveniles aged 16-18 and those below 167. The distinction is based on the

recognition of varying levels of maturity and culpability among different age groups.

¶ [27]. Vidula, as a signatory to the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child, has adopted

the Juvenile Justice Act in alignment with international standards. The Act's provisions,

including the treatment of juveniles aged 16-18, are consistent with the spirit of international

agreements. The decision of the Juvenile Justice Board to try Amar, Akbar, Anthony, and

Surjeet as adults was based on careful consideration, involving psychologists and psychiatrists.

The Board's decision, guided by expertise, should be respected, and claims of bias should be

substantiated with concrete evidence.

7
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, § 15, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, India (2015).

7|Page

Page 61
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [28]. The Juvenile Justice Act, 2012, is in pari materia with the Indian Juvenile Justice Act,

2015, and has been enacted to fulfil the constitutional mandate of protecting the welfare of

children. The constitutional provisions invoked in the PIL do not withstand scrutiny, as the Act

is in line with the constitutional framework of Vidula.

¶ [29]. In conclusion, the Juvenile Justice Act in Vidula, as applied in the case of Amar, Akbar,

Anthony, and Surjeet, is constitutionally valid, considering the specific circumstances and the

legal framework of the country. The differentiation based on age is a rational approach that

aligns with both domestic and international legal standards.

¶ [30]. It is humbly submitted that the handling of juveniles accused of serious offenses

separately aligns with the principles outlined in Article 14 of the Constitution8. This article

emphasizes equal protection under the law in similar circumstances. Section 15 of the statute

specifies that if a juvenile aged 16 to 18 is involved in a heinous crime and possesses adequate

mental and physical capacity, they should be prosecuted similarly to adults in a specialized

children's court.

¶ [31]. Juveniles endowed with the mental and physical capability to commit such serious

crimes pose a greater threat than their counterparts. Consequently, a more stringent legal

process is deemed necessary to effectively rehabilitate them. The Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act aims

to rehabilitate juveniles effectively, and section 15 imposes a more rigorous approach on those

aged 16 to 18 facing charges for heinous crimes, considering them as potentially hardened

offenders capable of rehabilitation through stricter provisions.9

¶ [32]. The respondent contends that any legislative provisions specifically tailored for children

would not be unconstitutional or discriminatory. The Act is designed for the welfare of children

8
India Const., Art. 14.
9
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, § 15, No. 2, Acts of Parliament, India (2015).

8|Page

Page 62
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

in need of assistance or in conflict with the law. Treating juveniles accused of heinous offenses

differently is consistent with the juvenile justice system's objective of reforming them and

enabling them to lead dignified lives, as safeguarded by Article 2110.

¶ [33]. It is further submitted before the Hon’ble court that such juveniles should be subject to

a more rigorous procedure due to their similar capacity to adults in committing crimes. Given

their extreme violent tendencies and adult-like capabilities, their reformation necessitates a

stricter approach. Section 15 of the JJ Act, 2015 addresses offenders with the capacity to

comprehend the nature and consequences of their actions, advocating against offering

protection to those capable of committing crimes as it would be an abuse of the law and

detrimental to society.

¶ [34]. To curb the rising rate of crimes committed by juveniles aged 16 to 18, it is imperative

to uphold these provisions. The stringent treatment is crucial for the reformation of these

hardened juveniles. Consequently, treating juveniles of this age group, possessing sufficient

maturity for heinous crimes, is scientifically sound and harmless, serving to protect society

from such potentially deterrent individuals.

34.1.In New York and North Carolina the minimum age at which all accused persons are
charged as adults is 13.
34.2.In Canada, the juveniles aged between 12 – 18 years who commit serious offence can be
treated as an adult. In United Kingdom children between 10 – 18 years can be tried by
Crown Courts.
34.3.In Michigan & Texas minimum age is 17.
34.4.In Washington, the minimum age depends on the severity of the crime.

10
Art. 21, INDIA CONST.

9|Page

Page 63
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [35]. In view of the above it is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble court that the provisions

ofthe Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 are not violative of any constitutional provisions and are in

pursuance of the objective of the juvenile justice system that is reformation of juveniles

inconflict with law. The JJ act, 2015 in no way hampers the rights of the juveniles and is

validand should be upheld.

10 | P a g e

Page 64
 MEMORANDUM for RESPONDENT [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced, and

authorities cited, may this Hon’ble Court be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

A. TO HOLD THE ORDER OF CONVICTION OF AMAR, AKBAR, ANTHONY AND SURJEET BY

SESSION COURT

B. TO DIRECT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION FILED BY PETITIONER SHOULD BE DISMISSED.

And /Or, Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity, and

good conscience.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

PLACE: Delhi sd/-

DATE: 12/02/2024 COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT

11 | P a g e

Page 65
V. MOOT COURT EXERCISE 3

Page 66
 TEAM CODE: TC01

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF NAHIRA

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NO. _/ 2024

(UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF NAHIRA)

IN THE MATTER OF

SOTHER BOLAM AND ORS. ..……………………………………...(APPELLANT)

V.
UNION OF NAHIRA…………………………………...…………..(RESPONDENT)

C/W

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. _/2024

(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF NAHIRA)

IN THE MATTER OF

QUANKAR BOLAM………………..…………………………….....(PETITIONER)
V.
UNION OF NAHIRA…………………………………………...…..(RESPONDENT)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER AND APPELLANTS

Page 67
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [TABLE OF CONTENTS]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS .........................................................................................II

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES................................................................................................IV

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..................................................................................VI

STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................................................................................VII

ISSUES RAISED ..................................................................................................................IX

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ...........................................................................................X

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ................................................................................................1

I. THE ORDER BY HIGH COURT WAS BAD IN LAW.......................................... 1

A. The Appeal Filed before this Hon’ble Supreme Court Under Article 136 is
maintainable………………………………………………………………………….............1

B. Catcher Pvt. Ltd. was the Right Authority under Article 226………………………......3

C. The National Wrestling Board Transgressed its powers……..…………………….……5

D. The National Wrestling Board has violated the Principles of Equality……………….7

II. THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE ATHLETES HAVE BEEN VIOLATED...................9

A. The Public Interest Litigation filed before this Hon’ble Supreme Court Under Article
32 is maintainable……………………………………………………………………………..…..9

B. The lifetime subscription of the Athletes violated the due process as mandated by the
Constitution………………………………………………………………………. ……............ 11

C. The National Wrestling Board, by sharing the data of the Athletes violated their Right
to Privacy………………………………………………………………………………………….14

PRAYER ................................................................................................................................XI

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE| I

Page 68
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

§ Section

¶/¶¶ Paragraph/Paragraphs

& And

AI Artificial Intelligence

AIR All India Reporter

Annx Annexure

Anr. Another

Art. Article

Const. Constitution

Del Delhi

DPDPA Digital Personal Data Protection Act

Honourable
Hon’ble

Id ibidem

IT Information Technology

Kar Karnataka

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | II

Page 69
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

NADA National Anti-Doping Agency

NWB National Wrestling Board

Ors. Others

p./pp. Page/Pages

Pvt. Private

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

UOI Union of India

v Versus

vol. Volume

WADA World Anti-Doping Agency

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | III

Page 70
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES

1. CONSTITUTION OF NAHIRA
2. Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
3. NADA Anti-Doping Rules
4. National Sports Code, 2011
5. United Nations (General Assembly), 2007. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
People
6. WADA Code of International Standard Testing and Investigations, 2023

CASES

1. Ajit Singh v State of Punjab, AIR 1967 SC 856: 1967 (2) SCR 143.

2. Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak

Trust v. V.R. Rudani, (1989) 2 SCC 691.

3. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, (2004) 3 SCC 349 (India).

4. Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board, 1966 SCC OnLine SC 53.

5. Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India and Anr (2018) 5 SCC 1.

6. Consumer Education & Research Centre v. Union of India, (1995) 3 SCC 42.

7. Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Limited v CIT, AIR 1989 SC 1298: (1989) 2 SCC 303.

8. E.P. Royappa V State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1974 SC 555.

9. Francis Coralie Mullin. Vs. Respondent: The Administrator, 1981 AIR 746.

10. Haryana State Industrial Corporation. v. Cork Mfg. Co., (200.7) 8 SCC 120.

11. Indian Young Lawyers Assn. (Sabarimala Temple-5J.) v. State of Kerala, (2019) 11 SCC 1.

12. K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. vs. Union of India ((2017) 10 SCC 1.

13. Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P., (2023) 4 SCC 1.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | IV

Page 71
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [INDEX OF AUTHORITIES]
14. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.

15. Narinder Batra v. Union of India, 2009 SCC OnLine Del 480.

16. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1.

17. Nepal Sarkar v. State of West Bengal, 1993 SCC OnLine Cal 84 (India).

18. R.C.Cooper v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 564.

19. Ramchand v. Union of India, AIR 1963 SC 563.

20. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1983 SCC OnLine Del 395.

21. State Bank of India v. A.G.D. Reddy, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1064

22. State of UP & Others v. Saroj Kumar Sinha, AIR 2010 SC 3131.

23. Sukhanandan Saran Dinesh Kumar v. UOI, AIR 1982 SC 902.

24. Vivekananda Kemali And State of Karnataka & ANR 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 360.

25. Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, (2005) 4 SCC 649

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | V

Page 72
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION]

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Petitioners have approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Nahira under Article 136 as
an appeal and under Article 32 of the Constitution of Nahira as a Public Interest Litigation.

The Article 136 of the Constitution of Nahira reads as hereunder:

“136. SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL BY THE SUPREME COURT
(1) Notwithstanding Anything In This Chapter, The Supreme Court May, In Its Discretion,
Grant Special Leave To Appeal From Any Judgment, Decree, Determination, Sentence Or
Order In Any Cause Or Matter Passed Or Made By Any Court Or Tribunal In The Territory
Of India.
(2) Nothing In Clause (1) Shall Apply To Any Judgment, Determination, Sentence Or Order
Passed Or Made By Any Court Or Tribunal Constituted By Or Under Any Law Relating To The
Armed Forces.”

The Article 32 of the Constitution of Nahira reads as hereunder:

“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.”

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VI

Page 73
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF FACTS]

STATEMENT OF FACTS

OVERVIEW OF NAHIRA AND BOLAM COMMUNITY

The state of Nahira is an island country with a population of ten billion. Out of all the ethnic
groups Naku community has the highest population (65%), followed by Bolam (15%). The
younger generation has migrated for employment mainly for manual labour. They are naturally
taller and physically stronger.

WRESTLING LEGACY AND MR. QUANKAR BOLAM'S IMPACT

Mr. Quankar Bolam, a renowned Bolam wrestler, triumphs globally, overcoming societal
stigmas. Post-retirement in 2005, he dedicated himself to coaching the Bolam community,
inspiring many. Despite national team offers, he prioritizes Bolam development, declining
other opportunities but remaining open to training in Bolara.

DRUG ALLEGATIONS AND PUBLIC STIGMATIZATION

In 2015, three Bolam athletes faced drug-related suspensions, alongside drug peddling
allegations against Mr. Quankar. Raids followed, including phone and laptop checks. Charges
were dropped by the Narcotics Control Bureau due to insufficient evidence. Mr. Quankar
emphasizes development over stigmatization in response to doping allegations. The National
Wrestling Board imposed lifetime suspensions for three Bolam athletes, leading to a legal
challenge based on the community's traditional practice of 'Batavari Srahmi Ras.'

AI DRUG TESTING COLLABORATION AND RACIAL PROFILING CONCERNS

The NWB, led by President Orry Naku, partners with Catcher Pvt Ltd. to employ AI algorithms
for drug testing based on bodily features and functions. raising concerns about racial profiling
and disproportionate testing, impacting morale and discouraging career pursuits. Mr. Quankar
advocates for Bolam representation in NWB leadership.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VII

Page 74
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF FACTS]

PUBLIC OUTCRY AND LEGAL CHALLENGES

Alleged racial profiling triggers public outcry, prompting a writ petition against Catcher Pvt.
Ltd. and NWB. However, the High Court dismisses the petition, asserting NWB's adherence
to its powers and Catcher Pvt Ltd. being an inappropriate authority. Facing lifetime
suspensions, Bolam athletes and Mr. Quankar appeal to the Supreme Court, alleging
fundamental rights violations. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Nahira agrees to hear both
matters, marking a critical juncture in the ongoing controversy.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | VIII

Page 75
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ISSUES RAISED]

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE:1

WHETHER THE ORDER GIVEN BY THE HIGH COURT WAS BAD IN LAW?

ISSUE:2

WHETHER THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE ATHLETES HAVE BEEN

VIOLATED?

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | IX

Page 76
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS]

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. THE ORDER BY THE HIGH COURT WAS BAD IN LAW

The Petitioners submits that the appeals before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Nahira are
maintainable under Article 136 of the Constitution. The dismissal of the petition by the High
Court of Zahura is deemed arbitrary, resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Moreover, the case
involves substantial questions of law, particularly regarding the violation of fundamental rights,
justifying the Supreme Court's intervention. The Petitioners contends that the High Court's
order was legally flawed for several reasons. Firstly, Catcher Pvt. Ltd. falls within the
jurisdiction of Article 226, making it the appropriate authority to address violations of
fundamental rights. Legal precedents and interpretations of Article 226 support this argument,
emphasizing that the term "authority" is not limited to statutory bodies but includes private
entities involved in public functions. Secondly, the National Wrestling Board (NWB) exceeded
its powers by collecting samples and data without proper authorization from the National Anti-
Doping Agency (NADA).

II. THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE ATHLETES HAVE BEEN VIOLATED

The Petitioners submits that the Public Interest Litigation before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of Nahira is maintainable under Article 32 of the Constitution. The Public Interest Litigation
filed under Article 32 addresses gross violations of fundamental rights affecting the Bolam
Community. The Petitioners contends that rights to equality, non-discrimination, livelihood,
and personal liberty have been infringed upon, warranting the PIL. 2. The Petitioners submits
that the fundamental rights of athletes have been violated, asserting that the National Wrestling
Board of India (NWB) qualifies as a 'State' entity under Article 12 of the Constitution due to
its close ties with the government. The NWB's involvement in international forums and
regulatory functions aligns with constitutional mandates, extending the applicability of
fundamental rights to its actions. Regarding the lifetime suspension of athletes, the Petitioners
argues that due process, as mandated by Article 21, has been breached.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | X

Page 77
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I. THE ORDER BY THE HIGH COURT WAS BAD IN LAW

¶ [1]. May it please the Hon’ble Justices of Supreme Court of Nahira,

The Petitioner & Appellant,

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

That it is humbly submitted by the Petitioners that the Order by the High Court was bad in law.
That, this contention is substantiated in a threefold manner:

[A] THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT UNDER
ARTICLE 136 IS MAINTAINABLE.

[B] CATCHER PVT. LTD WAS THE RIGHT AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 226.

[C] THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD TRANSGRESSED ITS POWERS.

A. THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT UNDER ARTICLE 136 IS

MAINTAINABLE.

¶ [2]. It is humbly and most respectfully submitted that this appeal to the writ petition, which

was dismissed by the High Court of Zahura, is maintainable as stated in the judgement of My

Palace Mutually Aided Cooperative Society Vs. B. Mahesh & Ors. that an appeal can be made

with the leave of the court by a person affected by the judgement interpreting domestic laws.2

2
My Palace Mutually Aided Cooperative Society Vs. B. Mahesh & Ors., (2022) SCC OnLine SC 1063.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 1

Page 78
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [3]. Article 136 of the Constitution of Nahira empowers this Hon’ble Supreme Court of

Nahira to grant special leave to appeal from any kind of judgment, decree, or order in any cause

or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India.5 Article 136 of the

Constitution of Nahira involves two steps, viz, (i) to grant a special leave to appeal, and (ii)

hearing the appeal. The first step continues up to the disposal of prayer for special leave to file

for an appeal.6 In the present case, it has been clearly stated that the Supreme Court has agreed

to hear the matter which implies that the first step has been completed and only the second

stage which is for the appeal to be heard on merits.7

¶ [4]. In arguendo, this Hon’ble Court has stated that Special Leave Petition being a special

power, is to be exercised only in those cases where special circumstances are shown to exist,

and whenever there is an injustice done to a party in a proceeding before a court or there is a

miscarriage of justice, or when a question of law of general public importance arises, or a

decision shocks the conscience of the Court, this jurisdiction can always be invoked. 11 If the

order has been passed based on a misunderstanding of the principle that governs its exercise,

then the Supreme Court would intervene if there has been a resultant failure of justice.12 It is

submitted that the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Zahura was arbitrary, injustice

was done to the parties and resulted in the failure of justice.

¶ [5]. It is respectfully submitted that the present case involves a substantial question of law.

As observed in Chunilal Mehta14 , “The proper test for determining whether a question of law

5
INDIA CONST. Art. 136.
6
MP JAIN, INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 237 (Lexis Nexis 8th edition, 2018).
7
Moot Proposition, page 4.
11
Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Limited v CIT, AIR 1989 SC 1298: (1989) 2 SCC 303.
12
Ajit Singh v State of Punjab, AIR 1967 SC 856: 1967 (2) SCR 143.
14
Sir Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons Ltd. v. Century Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd AIR 1962 SC 1314.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 2

Page 79
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

raised in the case is substantial would, in our opinion, be whether it is of general public

importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so

whether it is either an open question in the sense that it is not finally settled by this Court or by

the Privy Council or by the Federal Court or is not free from difficulty or calls for discussion

of alternative views”.

¶ [6]. The Petitioners are victims of injustice. Fundamental Rights to Equality under Article 14

and non-discrimination under Article 15 of the Constitution of Nahira have been violated.

Justice was denied when the Hon’ble High Court of Zahura arbitrarily dismissed the petition.

The Jurisdiction conferred under Article 136 is corrective and not restrictive. In the present

case, the rights of the members of the Bolam Community who are suffering from injustice and

the unreasonable, arbitrary decision of the High Court of Zahura as well as the ambiguity in

the law, are in question. Therefore, it is prayed before this Hon’ble Supreme Court of Nahira

that the Petitioners have Locus Standi and that the case is maintainable.

B. CATCHER PVT. LTD WAS THE RIGHT AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 226.

¶ [7]. It is humbly and most respectfully submitted that the writ petition before the High Court

was dismissed, stating that Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is not the right authority. The High Court, as per

Article 226, has the power to issue directions, orders or writs to any (i) person, (ii) authority

and (iii) government. The Supreme Court in Kaushal Kishore21 has stated that the scope of

authority extends to ‘private entities’ and can be included under the ambit of Article 226.

21
Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P., (2023) 4 SCC 1.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 3

Page 80
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [8]. Furthermore, it is submitted that Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is involved in ‘public function’ by

being in collaboration with NWB. The NWB is responsible for recruiting wrestlers for the

National Teams and, in general, all the functionalities and activities relating to wrestling in the

country. The National Sports Code explicitly states that it performs state-like functions such as

selecting national teams and representing the country in international sports events and

forums.22 This Court in St. Mary's Education Society held that a private body discharging a

public function and denial of any right is in connection with such public function, despite the

duty being statutorily conferred or otherwise would be amenable under Article 226.23

¶ [9]. This Hon’ble court has held that the jurisdiction of the Court in terms of violation of

fundamental rights under Articles 226 and 32 are different. The term “authority” used in Article

226, in the context, envisions a liberal meaning, unlike the term in Article 12.24 The words

“any person or authority” used in Article 226 are, therefore, not confined only to statutory

authorities and instrumentalities of the State. 25 They may cover any other person or body

performing public duty. The Court reiterated this in Janet Jeyapaul.26

¶ [10]. Therefore, it is humbly submitted that Catcher Pvt. Ltd. falls under the jurisdiction of

Article 226 and was the ‘right authority’ to enforce fundamental rights against.

22
National Sports Code 2011, Statement of Purpose 1.2.
23
St. Mary's Education Society v. Rajendra Prasad Bhargava, (2023) 4 SCC 498.
24
INDIA CONST. Art. 12.
25
Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V.R. Rudani,
(1989) 2 SCC 691.
26
Janet Jeyapaul v. SRM University, (2015) 16 SCC 530.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 4

Page 81
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

C. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD TRANSGRESSED ITS POWERS.

¶ [11]. It is humbly submitted that the NADA Anti-Doping Rules prescribe the subordination

of National Federations to the authority of NADA.30 The scope of their authority is limited to

cooperating with NADA in the performance of its functions mentioned under the Rules. 31

Under these Rules, NADA is the authority which has been empowered to collect samples32 for

testing following the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. Article 18.5 of the

Rules explicitly provides that

“All National Federations of India shall conduct Testing only under the documented

authority of their International Federation and using NADA or other Sample collection

authority to collect samples in compliance with the International Standard for Testing

and Investigations;

analysing all Samples collected using a WADA-accredited or WADA-approved

laboratory.”33

¶ [12]. Furthermore, it is submitted that the samples, related analytical data, and doping control

information may be used for anti-doping research by NADA, provided the athletes' written

consent. NADA further has to send the samples to WADA-accredited or WADA-approved

laboratories for analysis, following which the data generated can be used for research purposes.

The data collected by NADA may be shared with any third-party agents subject to appropriate

30
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 18.1.
31
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 18.2.
32
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 5.2.
33
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 18.5.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 5

Page 82
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

technical and contractual controls to protect the confidentiality and privacy of such

information.

¶ [13]. Therefore, NWB, the National Federation for Wrestling in Nahira, is not empowered

and is explicitly restricted in its powers to independently collect samples or data and share the

same with third-party agents unless the same has permission from the NADA. NWB is not

authorised to collect samples or conduct Testing at Event Venues without proper delegation as

it is a power solely enshrined upon NADA. 35 This is a substantial over-reach and non-

compliance with the Code and the Anti-Doping Rules. Furthermore, NADA is required to

exercise contractual controls to protect the confidentiality and privacy of information shared

with delegated third parties.36 In the absence of such contractual relations with NWB, as is

evident from the facts, NWB is acting ultra vires its powers.

¶ [14]. In arguendo, even if the NWB is considered competent to use the athletes' data, this has

to be done in a just, fair and reasonable manner. If the action of NWB is arbitrary and perverse

or contrary to settled principles and practices, it shall be subject to judicial review. This court

in Sushil Kumar 46 , while upholding the autonomous functioning of the National Sports

Federations, had provided that a Writ Court can interfere in the exercise of discretion of the

National Sports Federations where the discretion is shown to have been exercised in an

arbitrary, capricious, or perverse manner or contrary to settled principles or practices.

¶ [15]. An authority exercising powers under the legislation has to act in accordance with and

within the limits of the legislation; its order can be challenged if it is beyond those limits. In

35
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 5.3.
36
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 14.
46
Sushil Kumar v. Union of India, 2016 SCC OnLine Del 3660.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 6

Page 83
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

Barium Chemicals Ltd.47, it was stated that ‘it is settled in law that if a statute prescribes to

do a thing in a particular manner, it has to be done in the same manner or not at all.’ NWB,

even if it were acting in the exercise of its delegated authority, is in clear violation of the Rules

prescribed. The authority has significantly overstepped its bounds in violating the procedure

for the appropriation of data.

D. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD HAS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUALITY

¶ [16]. It is humbly submitted that the AI system was designed to analyse complex patterns

and identify potential signs of drug abuse based on facial features and bodily functions. The

AI algorithm requires a multitude of data and samples to work with and give a result. 48 The

data, which comprises ‘facial features and bodily functions’, were provided to Catcher Pvt.

Ltd. Primarily by NWB and collected through behavioural examinations of the athletes during

their performances. The ‘samples’ which were imperative for the conclusive determination of

the use of prohibited substances were conveniently ignored.

¶ [17]. It is submitted that the AI employed for the ‘efficient’ detection of potential signs of

drug abuse has been modelled based on ‘data’ about the individual’s facial features and bodily

behaviour during performances. The ‘behavioural examinations’ are not only illegally done but

are also inadequate. This system was built on mere naked-eye observations and not substantive

conclusive laboratory results. The ‘signs of drug abuse’ in this case are mere physical features

that were concluded to be indicative of the use of prohibited substances without corroboration.

47
Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board, 1966 SCC OnLine SC 53.
48
Moot Proposition, page 3.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 7

Page 84
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [18]. It is humbly and respectfully submitted that as laid down in Anwar Ali Sarkar49, the

Twin Test remains a pre-requisite for any classification the State makes.50 According to the

test: (i) there must be an intelligible differentia, (ii) the object must be constitutional, and (iii)

there should be a rational nexus with the object. NWB has classified the athletes based on the

variance in facial features and bodily functions, which are mere physical features. The object

behind such state action was to detect and deter drug abuse among athletes. Facial features and

bodily functions, which reflect a plethora of aspects, including genetics, geography, and diet

and so on, are not indicative of alien substances in one’s body. Hence, an AI which classifies

people based on such features has no rational nexus with the objective of detecting or deterring

drug abuse.

¶ [19]. Furthermore, the Apex Court in Navtej Singh Johar 51 , while highlighting the

inadequacies of the twin test, had stated that the over-emphasis on ‘objective’ should not curtail

the true extent of the protection guaranteed under Article 14. If the ‘effect’ of the state action

is discriminative and violates the principles of equality, then the same is a denial of the

protection so guaranteed. Furthermore, it was stated that the claims made by the State as to the

reason for such classification cannot be accepted without putting it to the test of reason through

the submission of cogent material.38 No cogent data was relied on to correlate the particular

set of facial features and bodily functions, which in any other instance would be considered

normal, to the presence of drugs in the system.

49
State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, AIR 1952 SC 75.
50
MPJAIN, INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Lexis Nexis 8th edition, 2018).
51
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 8

Page 85
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

¶ [20]. It is pleaded that for a state action to be qualified as non-arbitrary, the same should

qualify the test of proportionality as laid down in Modern Dental College52 and referred to in

Puttaswamy. To satisfy the test of proportionality, (i) the state action must have a legitimate

aim, (ii) the measure must be suitable for achieving the aim, (iii) it should be the least restrictive

alternative, (iv) there must be a balance between the extent of restriction and the importance of

the goal (proportionality stricto sensu).53

II. THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE ATHLETES HAVE BEEN VIOLATED.

That this contention is substantiated in a threefold manner:

[A] THE PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT UNDER ARTICLE 32 IS MAINTAINABLE

[B] THE LIFETIME SUSPENSION OF THE ATHLETES VIOLATES THE DUE

PROCESS AS MANDATED BY THE CONSTITUTION

[C] THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD, BY SHARING THE DATA OF THE

ATHLETES, VIOLATED THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

A. THE PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT
UNDER ARTICLE 32 IS MAINTAINABLE

¶ [21]. A Public Interest Litigation under Article 3256 of the Constitution of Nahira is filed

when there is a gross violation of the fundamental rights of a group or a class of people.54 PIL

52
Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of M.P., 2013 SCC OnLine MP 1132.
53
K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. vs. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
54
Arvind P. Datar, Commentary on the Constitution of India 542 (2nd ed. 2007).

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 9

Page 86
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

can be filed by any member of the public having a bona fide and sufficient public interest under

Article 32 of the Constitution of Nahira.55 This has been laid down in S.P Gupta,56 wherein PIL

can be filed by any member of the public or social action group acting bona fide seeking

redressal against violation of legal or constitutional rights of persons unable to approach the

Court due to social, economic, or other disabilities.

¶ [22]. It is humbly and most respectfully submitted that the National Wrestling Board of India

(NWB) unequivocally qualifies as ‘other authority’ as per the definition of 'State' under Article

12 of the Constitution. The government's explicit endorsement and support for NWB's

representation in international wrestling forums demonstrate a level of control and

involvement, meeting the criteria for the 'State' classification.

¶ [23]. It is submitted that NWB's role transcends mere sports organisation, encompassing

public duties and regulatory functions.57 The Delhi High Court's observations underscore the

imperative need for government recognition, highlighting the constitutional mandates of Entry

10 and 13 of Union List, 58 which exclusively reserved matters of foreign affairs and

participation in international events for the Union Government.59

¶ [24]. NWB's adherence to government recognition is crucial to safeguard national interests

and comply with diplomatic protocols, addressing diplomatic considerations and security

concerns. Furthermore, NWB's involvement in executing public functions and regulatory

activities in wrestling goes beyond the realm of a sports organisation, embracing

55
Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, (2004) 3 SCC 349 (India); Nepal Sarkar v. State of West Bengal,
1993 SCC OnLine Cal 84 (India); R. Lakshmipati v. S. Ramalingam, 1998 SCC OnLine Mad 427 (India).
56
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1983 SCC OnLine Del 395.
57
Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, (2005) 4 SCC 649.
58
INDIA CONST. Sch VII.
59
Narinder Batra v. Union of India, 2009 SCC OnLine Del 480.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 10

Page 87
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

responsibilities of public interest and regulatory oversight. This multifaceted role solidifies

NWB's classification as a 'State' within the purview of Article 12.

¶ [25]. Furthermore, the Board has always been subjected to de-facto control of the Ministry

of Youth Affairs and Sports.61 It is submitted that the Government of India has granted de-

facto recognition to the Board and continues to so recognise the Board as the Apex National

Body for regulating the sport of Wrestling in India. It is because of such recognition granted

by the Government of India that the team selected by the Board can represent itself as the

Indian wrestling team and if there had not been such recognition the team could not have

represented the country as the same in the international events. It is submitted that the Board

has to seek prior permission and approval from the Government of India whenever it has to

travel outside the country to represent the country.

¶ [26]. Hence, NWB can be held liable for the violation of the fundamental rights as enshrined

in the Constitution of Nahira.

B. THE LIFETIME SUSPENSION OF THE ATHLETES VIOLATES THE DUE PROCESS AS

MANDATED BY THE CONSTITUTION

¶ [27]. It is humbly submitted that the precedent set forth in Maneka Gandhi63 underscores the

imperative that any procedure contemplated by Article 21 of the Constitution of India must

withstand the scrutiny of reasonableness. For a procedure to be deemed just, fair, and

reasonable, and in compliance with Article 21, it is essential that it must not be arbitrary,

61
National Sports Code 2011, Article 3.6.
63
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 11

Page 88
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

fanciful, or oppressive. Any deviation from the standard of reasonableness renders the

procedure inadequate and fails to meet the constitutional mandate of Article 21.

¶ [28]. It is submitted that the NADA was duly established by the Government of India, and

subsequently, the Anti-Doping Rules were adopted in collaboration with the World Anti-

Doping Agency (WADA). These rules constitute a comprehensive framework that athletes are

obligated to adhere to. Notably, Article 2 of the National Anti-Doping Rules64 expressly lays

down that doping involves the contravention of one or more anti-doping rules delineated in

Articles 2.1 through 2.10. Therefore, athletes are bound by the stipulations set forth in these

rules, and any violation thereof constitutes an infringement under the purview of the antidoping

regulations established by NADA in concordance with international standards delineated by

WADA.

¶ [29]. Primarily, this Hon’ble court is urged to note that the alleged transgression by the NWB

pertains to Article 2.1, which sanctions the presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites

or markers in an athlete's sample.65 Pertinently, Article 4 of the rules outlines the Prohibited

List.66 It is hereby submitted before this Hon’ble court that the referenced prohibited list is none

other than the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List.

¶ [30]. It is imperative to underscore that within the entirety of the prohibited list, substances

classified as Actoprotectors, inclusive of but not limited to Bemitil, Thiazoloindole derivatives,

Succinic acid, and 3-hydroxyproline derivatives such as Mexidol,67 are conspicuously absent.

Therefore, the argument posited that athletes stand in violation of the stipulated rules lacks

64
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 2.
65
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 2.
66
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 4.
67
Ibid.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 12

Page 89
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

substantive merit. The absence of the specified substances from the WADA Prohibited List

substantiates the contention that the athletes in question have not breached the prohibitions

articulated therein.

¶ [31]. Furthermore, attention is drawn to Article 3 of the rules, which elucidates the criteria

for establishing Proof of Doping.69 Explicitly, it delineates that the burden of proof rests with

the National Anti-Doping Agency (NADA), necessitating the agency to substantiate an

antidoping rule violation. Noteworthy is the unequivocal stipulation that the standard of proof

required transcends the threshold of a mere Preponderance of probabilities.70

¶ [32]. It is respectfully submitted that the agency, in the present matter, has faltered in adhering

to the prescribed standard of proof as articulated in the applicable code. Contrary to the

procedural mandate, the Board has failed to furnish any form of substantiation before reaching

its decision. In glaring contrast, the decision appears to be predicated solely on an

unsubstantiated accusation devoid of merit. It is imperative to underscore that no evidentiary

support has been proffered by the Board in the course of its decision-making process.

Furthermore, it is brought to the court's attention that drug testing, a pivotal element in such

matters, was conducted subsequent to the imposition of a lifetime ban on the athletes,71 raising

serious concerns regarding procedural fairness and the integrity of the decision-making

process.

¶ [33]. It is submitted that this Court has recently reaffirmed that the purpose of judicial review

focuses on ensuring the legitimacy of the decision-making process and verifying the presence

69
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 3.
70
Ibid.
71
Moot Proposition, page 3.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 13

Page 90
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

of evidence to support the findings.72 Furthermore, the principles of natural justice are required

to be observed to ensure that justice is done and manifestly seen to be done. The object of the

principles of natural justice is to ensure that a government servant is treated fairly in

proceedings, which may culminate in the imposition of punishment, including

dismissal/removal from service.73

C. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD, BY SHARING THE DATA OF THE ATHLETES,

VIOLATED THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

¶ [34]. It is respectfully submitted that this Hon'ble court, in its seminal pronouncement in K.S.

Puttaswamy,78 established the right to privacy as an inherent and integral component of Article

21 of the Constitution of India.

¶ [35]. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA) unequivocally articulates the

parameters governing the consent of a Data Principal. Pursuant to its provisions, the consent

bestowed by the Data Principal must meet specific criteria. It shall be free, specific, informed,

with clear affirmative action, and shall signify an agreement to the processing of her personal

data for the specified purpose and be limited to such personal data as is necessary for such

specified purpose.79

¶ [34]. Such a requirement underscores the importance of ensuring that the Data Principal's

consent is obtained transparently, without coercion, and with a comprehensive understanding

72
State Bank of India v. A.G.D. Reddy, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1064.
73
State of UP & Others Vs. Saroj Kumar Sinha, AIR 2010 SC 3131.
78
K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. vs. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1.
79
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, § 6.3.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 14

Page 91
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

of the intended use of their personal data. This legislative framework aligns with the

constitutional recognition of the right to privacy, as delineated in the K.S. Puttaswamy

judgment, emphasizing the safeguarding of individuals' autonomy and control over their

personal information.

¶ [35]. It is hereby submitted that the 2021 Anti-Doping rules too clearly lay down, that

samples, related analytical data, and Doping Control information may be used for anti-doping

research purposes, although no Sample and data may be used for research without the Athlete's

written consent.80

¶ [36]. It is therefore contended that the submission of the athlete's data to a private company

without the presence of any kind of privacy guidelines or non-disclosure mechanism coupled

with the non-adherence to the set of rules enacted purely for the purpose of regulating the

workings of the NADA, with the added failure to collect the mandatory consent of the athletes

to forward their data for any other use than for testing clearly violates the Right to privacy of

the athletes guaranteed by this constitution.

¶ [37]. It is humbly submitted that occupation can be defined as a trade or calling in which a

person ordinarily seeks to get his livelihood.97 It is the contention of the Petitioners that in the

present scenario, the freedom, as guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) of the constitution Bolam

Athletes, has been violated by this order.

¶ [38]. The Supreme Court held in Md. Yasin,81 that the right under Article 19(1)(g) is affected

when “in effect and in substance”, the impugned measures brought about a total stoppage of

80
NADA Anti-Doping Rules, 2015, Article 6.3.
81
Mohammad Yasin v. Town Area Committee, AIR 1952 SC 115.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 15

Page 92
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

occupation or business, both in a commercial sense and from a practical point of view and it is

exactly what has happened in the present scenario. The athletes have been suspended for life

for a charge which, if proven, warranted a punishment of up to 4 years as a maximum. A

regulation becomes challengeable under Article 19(1)(g) if it is shown that it directly interferes

with the exercise of freedom.82

¶ [39]. Hence it is the contention of the Petitioners that in the present scenario, the unwarranted,

capricious, foul violation of fundamental rights is observed as the result of the unilateral

decision of a biased decision-making authority who have made a decision bad in law, with

subverting the due process as mandated by law, by showing profound discrimination against

the athletes of a particular ethnicity and for the sole reason to forward their majoritarian agenda.

¶ [40]. This decision cannot be held valid, and has to be overturned for the sheer disregard it

shows to the principles enshrined in the constitution of the country.

¶ [41]. Conclusively, it is contended that the increased scrutiny on the Batavari ras medicine is

violative of the fundamental rights of the Bolam People as guaranteed by the Constitution.

82
Sukhanandan Saran Dinesh Kumar v. UOI, AIR 1982 SC 902.

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 16

Page 93
 MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [ARGUMENTS ADVANCED]

PRAYER

Wherefore, in the light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced, and

authorities cited, may this Hon’ble Court be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

I. The present Special Leave Petition is maintainable and Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is the 'right
authority' to enforce fundamental rights against,
II. The Public Interest Litigation filed before this Hon’ble Court is Maintainable,
III. The National Wrestling Board has transgressed its powers and has violated the
provisions of the Constitution and the NADA Anti-Doping Rules,
IV. The lifetime suspension of the three athletes is void,
V. The targeting of the Bolam community by NWB's AI is discriminatory, violating
principles of equality,
VI. The consumption of the traditional medicine 'Batavari Ras' by Bolam athletes is not
violative of the prohibited list,
VII. The three unfairly suspended athletes be restored and adequate compensation for
nine years of unlawful suspension be provided,

And /Or, Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity, and

good conscience.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

PLACE: Delhi sd/-

DATE: 30/03/2024 COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

INTER MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2024 PAGE | 17

Page 94
VI. INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCE
AND OBSERVATIONS

Page 95
Reflections from Court Observance:

My journey through the legal corridors of courtrooms has been nothing short of enlightening.
Through immersive experiences like trial observation, legal drafting, etc., I have come to realize
that the essence of law transcends the confines of textbooks, finding its true resonance in the live
theatre of legal proceedings.

Participating in court proceedings has been a transformative experience, enriching my

understanding of legal principles beyond the confines of textbooks. Witnessing trials firsthand has
not only deepened my knowledge but also honed my advocacy skills. Through this immersion, I
have gained practical insights into the functioning of the legal system, from the application of rules
of evidence to the nuances of argumentation. Watching seasoned advocates has been an invaluable
learning experience, shaping my own courtroom demeanor and communication skills. Observing
civil litigation has provided me with a comprehensive understanding of legal practice in action.
From contractual disputes to divorce proceedings, each case has offered unique insights into the
complexities of civil law. Assisting in drafting legal submissions and witnessing the adjudication
process has enhanced my practical skills while deepening my appreciation for the nuances of real-
world legal disputes.

In the realm of criminal law, I have had the opportunity to witness the pursuit of justice and the
intricacies of bail applications. Analyzing crime scenes and drafting legal arguments has been a
challenging yet rewarding experience, allowing me to navigate the complexities of criminal
litigation. Despite the challenges, such as grappling with evidentiary issues, these experiences have
been instrumental in honing my analytical and advocacy skills.

My journey through various courts, from the Supreme Court to district courts, has been a rich
tapestry of learning and growth. Each courtroom encounter has expanded my legal horizons and
deepened my appreciation for the intricacies of the law. As I reflect on these experiences, I'm
reminded of the invaluable lessons learned and the profound impact they've had on shaping my
journey as a legal professional.

Page 96
Reflections from the Moot Court Exercise 1:
The first moot court problem I have encountered delves into complex legal issues surrounding
technology, privacy, and constitutional validity. Engaging with such a problem allowed me to
cultivate several skills essential for my growth as a law student, such as:
 Analytical Thinking: Addressing the constitutional validity of Section 69 of the
Information Technology Act and evaluating governmental control over cryptographic
techniques requires meticulous analysis of legal provisions, precedents, and international
standards. This problem challenged me to think critically and dissect legal arguments from
various perspectives.
 Research Skills: Crafting a persuasive argument necessitates thorough research to gather
relevant case law, legislative provisions, and scholarly articles. Engaging with legal
databases, academic journals, and authoritative sources sharpened my research abilities,
enabling me to construct well-founded arguments.
 Legal Writing: Drafting a coherent and persuasive memorial demands clarity, precision,
and adherence to legal norms. Through this process, I refined my legal writing skills,
learning to articulate complex legal arguments concisely and convincingly.
 Understanding Constitutional Principles: Delving into constitutional principles such as the
right to privacy and the proportionality test deepened my understanding of fundamental
rights and their interplay with legislative provisions. Exploring landmark judgments and
constitutional provisions enhanced my grasp of constitutional law fundamentals.

Apart from honing legal acumen, drafting a moot memorial fosters the development of various
other skills. Presenting arguments before a hypothetical court requires effective communication,
both in writing and orally. Crafting persuasive arguments and articulating them convincingly
sharpens communication skills, essential for legal advocacy. Further, analyzing legal issues,
identifying strengths and weaknesses in arguments, and formulating counterarguments fosters
critical thinking abilities. This skill is invaluable for legal reasoning and problem-solving.
Managing research, drafting, and revision within the constraints of a moot court competition hones
time management skills. Balancing multiple tasks and meeting deadlines prepares one for the
demands of legal practice.

Page 97
Finally, collaborating with teammates to develop cohesive arguments and construct a unified
memorial cultivates teamwork skills. Learning to leverage individual strengths and work
synergistically fosters effective collaboration, vital for professional success in the legal field.

Reflections from the Moot Court Exercise 2:

The moot problem revolves around the constitutionality of the Juvenile Justice Act and the
determination of juvenility based on the severity of offenses committed. As a law student,
grappling with this problem provides a unique opportunity to delve into constitutional law,
criminal law, and international legal principles.

Analyzing the constitutionality of the Juvenile Justice Act allowed us to explore the intricacies of
constitutional provisions and their alignment with international standards, such as the UN
Declaration on the Rights of the Child. Understanding how domestic legislation interacts with
international obligations broadens perspective on legal frameworks and their implications for
protecting vulnerable groups, such as juveniles. Furthermore, examining the determination of
juvenility in relation to the severity of offenses committed prompts critical thinking and legal
analysis. This issue necessitates a nuanced understanding of statutory provisions, case law, and
established legal principles governing juvenile justice. Engaging with this aspect of the moot
problem enhanced my ability to conduct thorough legal research, identify relevant precedents, and
construct persuasive arguments based on legal reasoning.

Drafting a moot memorial in response to this problem required clarity of thought and precision in
argumentation. Articulating my analysis of constitutional and international legal provisions, as
well as presenting persuasive arguments in favor of the Act's constitutionality, sharpened my
written communication skills. Moreover, crafting effective counterarguments to address potential
challenges to the Act's validity strengthened my ability to anticipate opposing perspectives and
bolster position through reasoned advocacy. Additionally, participating in moot court exercises
fosters teamwork and collaboration. Collaborating with peers to develop arguments, strategize
legal approaches, and refine written submissions enhances interpersonal skills and ability to work
effectively in a legal team.

Page 98
In summary, engaging with the moot problem and drafting a memorial offers a multifaceted
learning experience encompassing constitutional law, criminal law, legal research, critical
analysis, written communication, teamwork, and advocacy skills. Embracing the challenges
presented by this problem and seizing the opportunities for growth will undoubtedly contribute to
my development as a proficient and well-rounded legal professional.

Reflections from the Moot Court Exercise 3:

The third moot problem presents a complex legal scenario surrounding issues of racial profiling,
fundamental rights violations, and the jurisdiction of different legal bodies. Engaging with this
problem and drafting a moot memorial offered me several opportunities for personal growth as a
law student. Firstly, analyzing the legal intricacies of the case, such as the jurisdiction of the High
Court, the applicability of fundamental rights, and the powers of the National Wrestling Board
(NWB), required in-depth research and critical thinking. This process helped me develop legal
reasoning skills and enhanced my ability to navigate complex legal frameworks.

Crafting persuasive arguments in the memorial involves synthesizing legal principles, precedents,
and constitutional provisions to support your position. This exercise hones advocacy skills and
strengthens your ability to construct coherent and compelling legal arguments. Moreover,
addressing concerns of racial profiling and disproportionate testing raises broader societal and
ethical considerations. Engaging with these issues fosters awareness of social justice issues and
encourages one to reflect on the intersection of law, policy, and human rights.

Additionally, drafting a moot memorial involves collaboration with peers and receiving feedback
from mentors or coaches. Participating in this collaborative process cultivates teamwork and
communication skills, which are essential for legal practice and professional development.
Furthermore, the moot problem provides an opportunity to engage with international legal
principles, such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child and anti-doping regulations.
Exploring these international dimensions broadened my understanding of global legal frameworks
and their implications for domestic law and policy.

Page 99
Overall, tackling the moot problem and drafting a memorial not only deepened my understanding
of legal issues but also fostered my growth as a well-rounded and socially conscious legal
professional. Through this process, I developed critical thinking, advocacy, teamwork, and ethical
reasoning skills that are invaluable for my future career in law.

Conclusion

In conclusion, my journey through various legal experiences, including trial observation, legal
drafting, and participation in moot court exercises, has been a transformative learning process.
Engaging with real-world legal proceedings and grappling with complex legal problems has
deepened my understanding of legal principles and honed my practical skills as a law student.
Through these experiences, I have developed critical thinking, advocacy, research,
communication, teamwork, and ethical reasoning skills essential for my growth as a proficient and
socially conscious legal professional.

Page 100