Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

moot court preposition solution memorial file, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Law

moot court file respondents memorial saina and prabha vs ram

Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research

2021/2022
On special offer
30 Points
Discount

Limited-time offer


Uploaded on 02/18/2023

palaka
palaka 🇮🇳

5

(1)

1 document

1 / 13

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
CRIMINAL MOOT COURT FILE
KHALSA COLLEGE OF LAW
BEFORE HON’BLE SESSION COURT
State................................... Prosecution
Versus
Amit..................................... Accused
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED
Submitted to:- Submitted by:-
Prof. Parul kangniwal Bikramjit Singh 6022
BA L.LB 10thsem
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
Discount

On special offer

Partial preview of the text

Download moot court preposition solution memorial file and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Law in PDF only on Docsity!

CRIMINAL MOOT COURT FILE

KHALSA COLLEGE OF LAW

BEFORE HON’BLE SESSION COURT

State................................... Prosecution Versus Amit..................................... Accused MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED Submitted to:- Submitted by:- Prof. Parul kangniwal Bikramjit Singh 6022 BA L.LB 10thsem

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  1. TITLE PAGE
  2. TABLE OF CONTENTS
  3. LIST OF ABBREVIATION
  4. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
  5. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
  6. PARTS OF THE CASE
  7. STATEMENT OF CHARGES
  8. LAW INVOLVED
  9. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
  10. PRAYER CLAUSE WEBSITES
  11. Www.indiankanoon.org
  12. Www.manupatra.com
  13. Www.legalservicesindia.com

SC SUPREME COURT HC HIGH COURT SEC SECTION VS VERSUS IC INDIAN COURT CrPC CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE 4.INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

  1. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar & ... vs The State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 2 July, 2018
  2. Uday vs state of Karnataka
  3. Harish Kumar vs state 2010
  4. Ajay Manoj jaisinghani vs state of maharashtra
  5. Anjana saikia das vs anuradha das 2003 STATUES

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860 THE EVIDENCE ACT 1872 THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE 1973 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION District court of Jalandhar. The petitioner submits to the same. Section 209 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it. When in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate and it appears to the Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall- (a) 1 commit, after complying with the provisions of section 207 or section 208, as the case may be, the case to the Court of Session, and subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the

2.In the complaint it was stated by miss Priya that she used to visit in restaurant cum bar in Along with her friends where accused Amit Shabbir was manager. 3.Miss Priya states that Mr Amit used to follow her an approach to her on several occasions. Miss Priya openly stated that to Mr Amit that she did not like him. 4.Miss Priya disclosed this fact to her friends that once Amit has Hold her dupatta in the restaurant and try to molest her. She was going through psychological and emotional trauma because of the behaviour of said Amit Shabbir. 5.Amit promised to marry miss Priya and on the false promise of marriage he forcefully developed physical relation with miss Priya and even she was not also forced to have alcohol during her meeting with Amit and also showing her some video on pornography against her will. 6.She further stated that Amit had taken photos of intimate relations with her and had send her for those photos on her WhatsApp asking for further sexual favours.

7.Miss Priya lodged FIR U/S 354A, 354 B 354C, 354 D, 350, 351, 376 of IPC and section 66C, 66 E, 66 east of IT act 2000s with chembur police station stated that Amit has committed Against priya in the year 2013 and did not marry her in spite of promising her. 8.Further Amit file who is already on anticipatory bail granted by the honourable session court has filed a criminal application article 226 of the constitution and under section 482 of criminal procedure code 1973 in Bombay High Court for quashing of the said F.I.R filed against him while the matter is pending in the trial court and the charge sheet is not yet filed. STATEMENT OF CHARGES

  1. Whether Amit can be accused of rape under IPC, 1860 besides other alleged offences and punished under section 376 of IPC, 1860?
  2. Whether compensation can be asked in such criminal matter if yes by whom and from whom?
  1. Defamation.—Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that person. Explanation 1.—It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives. Explanation 2.—It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such. Explanation 3.—An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation. Explanation 4.—No imputation is said to harm a person’s reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful Arguments in favour of Accused
  2. Whether Amit can be accused of rape under IPC, 1860 besides other alleged offences and punished under section 376 of IPC, 1860?  Priya filed a false FIR against Amit where she states that Amit raped her but there’s a huge difference between consensual sex and rape. Amit and Priya were major and their consent was involved. As in the definition of rape u/s 375 of IPC it is clear that consent is essential part to consider any sexual intercourse to be rape. Case :- Dhruvaram murlidhar sonar vs State of Maharashtra 2018

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has clarified that consensual physical relationship cannot be termed as rape. In the landmark Judgement, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has demarcated grounds based on which every physical relation cannot be termed as rape and in order to understand decision passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  Complainant defame Amit and in this result he suspended from his job. Case:- Uday vs State of Karnataka 2003 Supreme court observed that the consent given by the victim to sexual intercourse with a person whom she is deeply in love on a promise to marry her in future, cannot be said to a misconception of fact under Section 90 of IPC and hence, the accused will not be convicted for rape within the meaning of Section

  1. Thus, the court restricted the meaning of Section 90 and held that sexual intercourse on a promise to marry would not fall under the ambit of Section 375.  It is cleared that the consensual sex does not amount to an offence of rape and all the charges imposed on Amit are false. Accused has not committed any offence under section 354A, 354 B, 354 C, 354 D, 350, 351 of IPC and no evidence found against accused in investigation. Case:- Harish Kumar v. State 2010 (4) JCC 2371 The Hon’ble Court contends that a promise to marry which is later denied does not amount to offence of rape and it is a breach of promise and the complainant should seek a civil remedy Case:- In Akshay Manoj Jaisinghani v. The State of Maharashtra Only because two individuals are sexually involved with each other, it is not compulsory for them to marry. This cannot be labelled in any manner as a rape.”

PRAYER CLAUSE

Therefore, in light of facts stated, issues raised, Authorities cited and arguments advance may this honourable court be pleased to adjudge and declare that:  That the Accused is being falsely accused of the offence of rape, hence he has not committed any such offences.  that Accused should not be punished for the offences of rape under section 376 of IPC.  That the Accused should be allowed to proceed with a defamation case against the complainant for damaging his reputation with the false rape allegation. AND Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience. All of which is most humbly prayed.