Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3 Amity National Moot Court Competition 2015
3 Amity National Moot Court Competition 2015
UNIVERSITY
TEAM CODE
State of
Rajasthan.........................................................................APPELLANT
V.
Bhanwarlal and
others.....................................................................................RESPOND
ANT
TABLE OF CONTENT
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES..........................................................3
ABBREVIATION...........................................................................6
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.............................................7
STATEMENT OF FACTS.............................................................8
STATEMENT OF ISSUES............................................................11
SUMMARY OF ARGUEMENTS.................................................12
ARGUEMENT ADVANCED........................................................14
PRAYER..........................................................................................34
2|Page
Index of Authorities.
V. E- Sources
www.scconline.co.in
www.manupatra.com
www.westlaw.com
www.IndianKanoon.com
5|Page
ABBREVIATIONS
6|Page
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Appellant has the honour of submitting written submission before this Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India through special leave petition under Article 136 of the constitution. This sincere
submission of the counsels is further substantiated in the Written Submissions.
Place: India
7|Page
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Ms.Shalini aged about 20 years, the complainant, was a nursing student and was living
in a Hostel at Jaipur. On 20th December, 2014Bhanwarlal the choukidar and tribhuwan the
multimillionaire spoilt student kidnapped her carried her to the room of choukidar where Mohan
and Sohan were drinking heavy liqour. Only 3-4 students were there in the hostel and staff
member and warden were not present. She was gang-raped by all.
2. She was thrown outside the backside of the hostel about 4 am about 5am she came to little
senses and noticed by certain paasersby she was thaken to the police station where fir was lodged
and case under 364A,376D was registerd.
2.1 A Panchnamah was prepared. Exhibit-A-1 contains the list of articles confiscated by the
Investigation Officer viz torn out Kurta, Payjama, panty, hawaichappal, non-vegetarian food
items, tumblers, liquor bottles, drugs, cigarettes, hukka with tobacco and Matchbox, other
intoxicants, sharp knife weapon, Cash Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 50,000/- etc. Four mobile cells of the 4
accused were found and seized. On checking of call list it was found (i) there had been call in
between the 4 accused in the evening at about 7.00 P.M. and (ii) two missed calls were by
Tribunvan to the Complainant on 29.5.2009. Site map was prepared which is Exhibit A-2. A
classic car Mercedes registered in the name of father of Tribhuvan and the driving licence of
Tribhuvan were found apart from one motor bike in the Campus. In the Car one bottle of foreign
liquor was also found with bed sheets, carpet, cosmetics, cigars etc. The complainant was
required to undergo medical examination within 12 hours. The Medical Jurist in the report stated
that blood was seen in the vagina and hymen of the complainant was found to have been
ruptured and damaged. The accused were also required to undergo ‘Sperm Detection Test’ and
the report corroborated the claim of the complainant. Presence of semen and human spermatozoa
on the bed sheets of the mattress were noticed.
8|Page
4.1 He is a minor. He produced his horoscope, birth certificate and matriculation certificate
wherein he was found as having completed 17 years and 10 months on the date of event. He
smilingly stated that he had inter-course with the complainant gracefully, she was in proper
senses and co-operative. She was misused by other accused. He was declared as minor.
4.2 Shri Mohan claimed that he was out of the town, came to his house at about 11.00 P.M. and
had not gone to the room of Bhanwarlal. He denied the charge. However, the Motor bike is
registered in his name. He failed to prove his denial.
4.3 ShriSohan corroborated the rape story but claimed that he was persuaded by Tribhuvan to
have forcible inter-course for his pleasure. ShriTribhuvan was watching the action.
4.4 ShriBhanwarlal confessed guilty but stated that he had to co-operate and plan as Tribhuvan
gave him Rs. 10,000/- and also persuaded for forcible rape.
5. The Sessions Judge, Jaipur by judgment dated 30.12.2010 convicted the accused after
holding that the prosecution has proved its case fully supported by independent witnesses and
medical evidence on record apart from the Sperm Detection Test stained clothes, mattress with
blood, drugs, intoxicants, cash etc. The Sessions Judge Court considering the defence evidence
convicted the accused as follows :-
(iii) ShriSohan, student to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 7 years; and
(iv) ShriThribuvan, having been proved as minor to be dealt with separately under the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of children) Act, 2000.
6. Session court also links the offence of rape to the right to life and cited the case of
BodhisatwaaGautam.
7. Aggrieved by the said judgement, the respondents accused as well as the complainant
preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 5 - 8/2011 before the Hon’ble High Court of
Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench. Taking a lenient view of the matter, on appreciation of
defence evidence and non-availability of any independent eye witness, reduced the sentence
awarded by the Sessions Court to the following period:-
(ii) Shri Mohan to undergo simple imprisonment for five years; and
The appeals of the accused were allowed in above terms and appeal of the complainant to
enhance sentence and damages was dismissed, being bereft of any substance.
8. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the complainant as well as the accused, BhawarLal,
Mohan and Sohan have filed appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme
Court has issued notices confining to the issues regarding the sentence and damages. The
Supreme Court also issued notice as to why the sentence awarded by the High Court to the three
accused respondents be not restored to that of the sentence awarded by the Sessions Court and
why the accused BhawarLal not to undergo life imprisonment for whole of the convict’s life.
10 | P a g e
ISSUES RAISED
1.1) The guilt of the accused has been proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
1.3) Reduction of the sentence awarded to the accused by the high court is not justifiable.
3) whetheror not Tribhuwan is entitled to protection under Juvenile justice (care and protection)
Act?
11 | P a g e
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
Accused have committed the heinous crime of gang rape. All the accused shared the common
intention as they planned to kidnap the girl and bring her to the chowkidars room where other
two accused were already present. The accused talked between themselves four hour before the
commission of the rape. From the present circumstances it is quiet evident that all of them shared
the common intention of raping the girlt. The circumstantial evidences proves it further.
In the cases of rape testimony of the prosecutrix is considered as the sole ground for the
conviction. In the present case the prosecutris stood to the test of the cross-examination. It
clearly indicates that she gave statement against the accused.The circumstantial evidence in the
present case fully corroborates the claim of the complainant. The punchnama the medical
evidences, the sperm detection test etc fully supports the prosecution case.
The other important factor that makes the conviction doubtless is the confessions made by the
accused two of the accused directly accepted the commission of the offence. The other accused
in a different manner accepted the commission of the rape by them.
Thus from all these evidences the guilt of the accused is proved beyond any reasonable doubt
and thus the Sentence awarded to accused should be modified.
Rape is a crime which has a very horrific characteristic that is the continuous destruction of the
life of the prosecutrix. It is not the crime, which has physical pain, but it leaves the mental status
of the victim a emotionless, desire less, and so on and so forth. The moment a women has been
the victim of the rape it is practically impossible for that woman to come back to the normal
stage of the life and to start the life from where she left. Awarding 50 Thousand rupees for that
purpose is adding insult to the injuries to the victim. Any amount of compensation is not going to
12 | P a g e
The Supreme Court in various cases has awarded the compensation from time to time as per the
gravity of the commission of the rape. Sessions court awarded the compensation of 10 lakhs
rupee which was not sufficient in the first place itself. High court reduced that amount to rupees
50 thousand which is mockery of justice by the high court.
Compensation will not change the life of the rape survivor but to compensate the loss she has
received in the form of the mental pain court should award reasonable amount of compensation
to the victim.
(3) Weather Tribhuwan is entitled to protection under Juvenile justice (care and
protection) Act?
The first submission is the doubt regarding the real age of the Tribhwan medically he is above 18
years of age and he has a driving license thus the credibility of the academic record are in
question here. The crime committed by him is the very gruesome and barbaric his act has
destroyed the life of the rape survivor.
Second submission is the age of juvenile for considering the protection. 18 year is unreasonable
for that a person of 18 years has the rationality to understand the nature and characteristic of the
crime he is committing. Law needs to be changed on that regard.
13 | P a g e
ARGUEMENT IN ADVANCE
The complainant who is the rape survivor finds it difficult to accept the judgment given by the
sessions court and the high court respectively. The punishment given to the accused and the
compensation awarded to the rape survivor are not adequate to call it justice thus this appeal has
been preferred to get justice.
Contention 1.1 : the guilt of the accused has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
One of the basic principles of criminal jurisprudence is to prove the guilt of accused beyond any
reasonable doubt. In the present matter the accused were convicted by the session judge, Jaipur.
the Jaipur bench of the Rajasthan high court sanctioned the findings of the sessions court Jaipur.
the way the present offence is committed is gruesome and the offence which has been committed
is the most heinous crime. The accused were convicted for the offence of rape and kidnapping.
The Appellants most humbly submits that sessions court rightly held the accused as guilty. The
submission of the Appellants regarding the pertaining issue is as follows.
375. Rape.- a man is said commit “rape” who, except in the hereinafter excepted, has sexual
intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following
descriptions:-
In the instant case all the accused had the sexual intercourse with the rape survivor without her
consent from the circumstantial evidences, the medical report and other evidence like the
statement of the prosecutrix and confessions made prove the entire point.
14 | P a g e
In Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana1, the Supreme Court observed : In order to establish an
offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, read with Explanation I thereto,the prosecution must
adduce evidence to indicate that more than one accused had acted inconcert and in such an event,
if rape had been committed by even one, all the accused will beguilty irrespective of the fact that
she had been raped by one or more of them and it is notnecessary for the prosecution to adduce
evidence of a completed act of rape by each one of theaccused. In other words, this provision
embodies a principle of joint liability and the essence of that liability is the existence of common
intention; that common intention presupposes priorconcert which may be determined from the
conduct of offenders revealed during the course ofaction and it could arise and be formed
suddenly, but, there must be meeting of minds. It is notenough to have the same intention
independently of each of the offenders. In such cases, theremust be criminal sharing marking out
a certain measure of jointness in the commission ofoffence. In the present case all the accused
share the common intention as after kidnapping she has been taken to the choukidars room where
other two accused were waiting for the other two accused and prosecutrix2.
In Bhupinder Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh3, the supreme court stated that In cases of
gang rape the proof of completed act of rape by each accused on the victim is not required. The
statutory intention in introducing Explanation I in relation to Section 376(2)(g) appears to have
been done with a view to effectively deal with the growing menace of gang rape. In such
circumstances, it is not necessary that the prosecution should adduce clinching proof of a
completed act of rape by each one of the accused on the victim or on each one of the victims
where there are more than one in order to find the accused guilty of gang rape and convict them
under Section 376. In the present case all the accused had the intercourse with the rape survivor
1
(2003) 2 SCC 143 (para 8)
2
Refer moot problem para 1
3
(2003) 8 SCC 551
15 | P a g e
In Pardeep Kumar v Union Administration, Chandigarh7 the supreme court held that To bring the
offence of rape within the purview of Section 376(2)(g), IPC, read with Explanation 1 to this
Section, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove:-
(i) That more than one person had acted in concert with the common intention to commit rape on
the victim ;
(ii) That more than one accused had acted in concert in commission of crime of rape with pre-
arranged plan, prior meeting of mind and with element of participation in action. Common
intention would be action in consort in pre-arranged plan or a plan formed suddenly at the time
of commission of offence which is reflected by element of participation in action or by the proof
of the fact of inaction when the action would be necessary. The prosecution would be required to
4
Refer para 5 of the moot problem
5
Refer para 2 and 4 of the moot problem.
6
JT 2006(6) SC 303
7
(2006) 10 SCC 608,
16 | P a g e
The present matter fulfills all these ingredients as the total no of accused are four two of the
accused acted on the plan of kidnapping the prosecutrix they talked in between themselves four
hours before the commission of the offence.
Thus from all these circumstances the explanation of 376D is proved. All the accused have
committed gang rape.
The circumstantial evidences support the prosecution case. In the Panchnamah torn out Kurta,
Payjama, panty, hawaichappal, non-vegetarian food items, tumblers, liquor bottles, drugs,
cigarettes, hukka with tobacco and matchbox,other intoxicants, sharp knife weapon, cash Rs
1000/- + 50000/- etc. four mobile phone of the four accused were found.Thus the items which
were used for the commission of this crime has been seized.
After the amendment of the 1983 in the criminal law the burden of proof shifts on the accused to
prove that there was a consensual sex. Section 114 was amended and 114A was introduced.
114A. “In a prosecution for rape under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) or
clause (e) or clause (g) of the sub-section(2) of section 376 of the Indian penal code(45 of 1860)
where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and and the question is whether it was without
the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and she states in her evidence before the
court that she did not consent, the court shall presume that she did not consent”
A lady will not give consent to the sexual intercourse with four person that is simple
commonsense that is why law presume that there was no consent. In the case of Imran khan v.
17 | P a g e
In the case of Dilip and anr.vs. State of M.P.12 it was held that "Conviction for an offence of rape
can be based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix corroborated by medical evidence and
other circumstances such as the report of chemical examination." In the present case the
prosecutrix stood to the test of cross examination13and asked for the strict punishment it shows
that she stated against the accused. In the typical Indian society it takes a lot of courage to fight
for the rape cases if someone is, fighting it prima facilely establishes that she has been ravished.
8
(2011)10SCC192
9
Supra.
10
(2008) 5 SCC 354
11
Refer para 4 of the moot probleem
12
MANU/SC/0678/2001
13
Refer to the para 4 of the moot problem
18 | P a g e
The onus on the prosecution is to establish that the accused were present at the time and place of
the incident. The accused could be traced out in the intoxicating condition in the chowkidars
room. The Mercedes of the accused was present at the place of the incident the motor bike of the
mohan was there at the place of the incident and he failed to prove the defence of alibi.
Bhawarlal and Sohan confessed.
Section 30 of the Indian evidence Act is also attracted. Section 30 of the Indian evidence Act has
heading consideration of proved confessions affecting person making it and others jointly trial
for same offence.
30. When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession
made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such person is proved, the court
may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the
person who makes such confession.
In the case of Bishnu Prasad and another v. State of Assam 14 it was held that a confessional
statement, as is well known, is admissible in the evidence. It is a relevant fact. It may also form
the basis of the conviction,wherefor the court may have only to satisfy itself in regard to
voluntriness and truthness thereof and in given cases some corroboration thereof. In the case of
Sidharth v. State of Bihar15 the court accepted the confessions as the evidence. In the case of
State of T.N. v. kutty16, Bhagwan Singh v. state of M.P17, Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh v. State of
Punjab18 it was held that in a cases where sufficient materials are brought on record to lend
assurance to the court in regard to truthfulness of the confession made, which is corroborated by
several independent circumstances lending assurance therto, even a retracted confessions may be
acted upon.
14
(2007) 11 scc 467
15
(2005) 12 scc 545
16
(2001) 6 scc 550
17
(2003) 3 scc 21
18
Air 1957 sc 637
19 | P a g e
Thus it is clear that the accused in furtherance of common intention gang raped the rape survivor
circumstantial, medical, testimony and confession proves the case of prosecution beyond any
reasonable doubt.
Primarily it is to be borne in mind that sentencing for any offence has a social goal. Sentence is
to be imposed regard being had to the nature of the offence and the manner in which the offence
has been committed. The fundamental purpose of imposition of sentence is based on the
principle that the accused must realize that the crime committed by him has not only created a
dent in his life but also a concavity in the social fabric. The purpose of just punishment is
designed so that the individuals in the society which ultimately constitute the collective do not
suffer time and again for such crimes. It serves as a deterrent. True it is, on certain occasions,
opportunities may be granted to the convict for reforming himself but it is equally true that the
principle of proportionality between an offence committed and the penalty imposed are to be
kept in view. While carrying out this complex exercise, it is obligatory on the part of the Court to
see the impact of the offence on the society as a whole and its ramifications on the immediate
collective as well as its repercussions on the victim20. In the present case the punishment
awarded by the sessions court at the first place itself to the accused do not fulfills above
principle.
In the case of Jameel v. State of Uttar Pradesh21, the supreme court held that speaking about the
concept of sentence, has laid down that it is the duty of every court to award proper sentence
19
Refer to Para 5 of the moot problem.
20
AIR 2013 SC 2209
21
(2010) 12 SCC 532
20 | P a g e
In the case of In Jugendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh22, while dwelling upon the gravity of
the crime of rape, this Court had expressed thus: - Rape or an attempt to rape is a crime not
against an individual but a crime which destroys thebasic equilibrium of the social atmosphere.
The consequential death is more horrendous. It is tobe kept in mind that an offence against the
body of a woman lowers her dignity and mars herreputation.
In State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa23, a three-Judge Bench opined that the courts must hear the
loud cry for justice by the society in cases of the heinous crime of rape on innocent helpless girls
of tender years and respond by imposition of proper sentence. Public abhorrence of the crime
needs reflection through imposition of appropriate sentence by the court. It was further observed
that to show mercy in the case of such a heinous crime would be travesty of justice and the plea
for leniency is wholly misplaced. The session court was lenient in its view while awarding the
punishment for the heinous crime of gang rape.
In Gopal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand24, while dealing with the philosophy of just punishment
which is the collective cry of the society, a two-Judge Bench has stated that just punishment
would be dependent on the facts of the case and rationalised judicial discretion. Neither the
personal perception of a Judge nor self- adhered moralistic vision nor hypothetical apprehensions
should be allowed to have any play. For every offence, a drastic measure cannot be thought of.
Similarly, an offender cannot be allowed to be treated with leniency solely on the ground of
discretion vested in a Court. The real requisite is to weigh the circumstances in which the crime
has been committed and other concomitant factors. The gang rape of a student who has not
completed 20 years of her life and in front of whom the whole future lies to live with but the
22
(2012) 6 SCC 297
23
(2000) 4 SCC 75
24
2013 (2) SCALE 533
21 | P a g e
In State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh and others25,the Court observed the effect of rape on a victim
with anguish: - "We must remember that a rapist not only violates the victim's privacy and
personal integrity, butinevitably causes serious psychological as well as physical harm in the
process. Rape is notmerely a physical assault - it is often destructive of the whole personality of
the victim. Amurderer destroys the physical body of his victim, a rapist degrades the very soul of
the helplessfemale." The present case is no exception the stigma of this unfortunate event on her
life will force her to live with the depression.
In DhananjoyChatterjee v. State of W.B.26 this Court has observed that a shockingly large
number of criminals go unpunished thereby increasingly encouraging the criminals and in the
ultimate, making justice suffer by weakening the system's creditability. The imposition of
appropriate punishment is the manner in which the court responds to the society's cry for justice
against the criminal. Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime
so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The court must not only keep in view
the rights of the criminal but also the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large
while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment.
In the present case a student of nursing was raped by four accused person after ravishing her she
was thrown outside the boundary wall of the backside of the hostel in a naked (unconscious)
condition. Her hymen was ruptured and blood came out of the vagina she was kidnapped at
11pm and thrown outside at about 4 am it means for about 5 hours she was there in the
chowkidars room she might have been raped twice, thrice as the medical report specifically
shows that the gang rape was mercilessly done. The chowkidar who is supposed to be the
protector became the rapist the spoiled student subjected the nursing student a thing to entertain
their lust. These rapist deserve the maximum punishment not the mercy of the court. Awarding a
25
AIR 1996 SC 1393
26
22 | P a g e
Contention1. 3. The grounds on which high court reduced the judgment are unreasonable.
The minimum statutory punishment for the gang rape is 10 year however if there are special and
adequate reasons the punishment can be decreased. If the sentence has been awarded less than 10
years then those reasons must be mentioned in the judgement. In the present case high court
reduced the sentence less than 10 years on the appreciation of the defence evidence those
specific defence evidence has not been disclosed by the high court which seems unreasonable.
The social impact of the crime e.g. where it relates to offences against women, dacoity,
kidnapping, misappropriation of public money, treason and other offences involving moral
turpitude or moral delinquency which have great impact on social order and public interest,
cannot be lost sight of and per se require exemplary treatment. Any liberal attitude by imposing
meagre sentences or taking too sympathetic a view merely on account of lapse of time in respect
of such offences will be resultwise counterproductive in the long run and against societal interest
which needs to be cared for and strengthened by a string of deterrence inbuilt in the sentencing
23 | P a g e
2013(9)SCALE400
27
AIR2013SC1119
28
24 | P a g e
In the case of state of M.P. v. Rakesh31 the sessions court awarde punishment of 10 years the
high court reduced it to 8 months Supreme Court held that high court has taken a wrong decision
and SC set aside the judgment of the high court. In the case of Ramjilal and others v. state of
M.P32 the court held that no interference is required where for gang rape 10 year of
imprisonment was awarded by the court of the session on appeal high court confirmed it sc held
that even 10 year of imprisonment is not adequate but. State has not appeal in this issue hence no
interference.
In the present case interference is required if all the accused are not awarded life imprisonment
then the system of justice will be of new use.The duty of the court is to provide justice not
awarding the life imprisonment to all the accused if protecting them. The high court is protecting
the accused who for their lust ravished the entire life of the rape survivor. The nursing student
will be living in the state of agony through her rest of life. If the accused are not awarded the
highest punishment then the courts are falling short of their duty.
Thus when the guilt of the accused has been proved beyond reasonable doubt session court at the
first place itself did not awarded the adequate punishment the high court instead of enhancing the
sentence reduced the sentence against the law as the proviso of section 376 (2) is not applicable
in the present case.
29
(2005) 5 SCC 413
30
MANU/SC/2477/2005
31
MANU/SC/2477/2005
32
2011 Indlaw SCO 698
25 | P a g e
33
1995 (1) SCC 14
26 | P a g e
In the case of Satya Pal Anand Vs.State of M.P34.the supreme court held that The traumatic
stress which a gang rape victim undergoes every moment of her life cannot be compensated by
any amount. As a matter of fact, no amount of money can restore dignity and confidence of a
rape victim. However, certain measures like adequate compensation, insurance and social
security schemes may help in rehabilitating rape victim to some extent.in this case Supreme
Court increased the compensation from 2 lakhs to 8 lakhsand in the present matter the
compensation was reduced to 50 Thousand from 10 lakhs the compensation amount must be
increased.
In the case of C.Thekkamalai v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2006 Crl.L.J. 1997, a writ
petition was filed on behalf of Thekkamalai and his wife, Lakshmi, to direct the Government to
pay a fair and reasonable amount as compensationto Lakshmi and Thekkamalai, to provide
adequate and suitable rehabilitative measures to them, to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor
with the consent of the Chairman of the Tamil Nadu Legal Aid Board for conducting the trial on
the file of the learned 1st Assistant Sessions Judge, Trichy and to provide adequate personal
protection to the abovesaid persons. It was a case of rapecommitted by the Sub-Inspector of
Police. The trial Court convicted the accused and directed him to pay Rs.2,00,000/- and
Rs.50,000/- to Lakshmi and Thekkamalai respectively. This Court, on appeal, confirmed the
same. In the writ petition filed, the Division Bench enhanced the compensationto Rs.5,00,000/-.
Taking note of the amount of Rs.85,000/- already paid to the victims, the Division Bench
directed the accused to deposit the balance amount in a fixed deposit.
MANU/SC/0825/2013
34
27 | P a g e
35
2013 Indlaw GUW 20
36
28 | P a g e
Rape is a crime which not only physically assaults the victim but also mentally harasses her.
Every morning the rape survivor wakes up her life with the depression and agony starts. The
offence of rape changes the entire life rape survivor it drags the life of the victim to the dark well
of the disappointments. Any amount cannot compensate the crime of the rape but still for the
hope of relief or for token of relief the compensation must be awarded.
Her bright future as a nurse was on the verge of being and could possibly still be tarnished as a
result of the acts of a few who have no respect for human dignity and rights and are unfit for any
society. Thus the purpose of compensation being to provide comfort to the victim in the form of
money and having been proved and upheld that gang-rape did take place, then, based upon what
reason the hon'ble high court lowered the amount of compensation to the victim is still in the
dark.
The sessions court in its judgement had mentioned about the crime as a heinous and cruel act and
talked about fulfilling the deterrent theory of punishment. As stated in BodhisatwaGautam v.
SubhraChakroborty : It is a crime violative of the victims most cherished of all fundamental
rights: The right to life (art. 21 constitution). 3 of the 4 accused are people with power and
pecuniary affluence and they thought they could get away with everything with the use of such
power. It would only be justified and deterrent if they are made to compensate for not only her
physical wounds but also to redeem as it is impossible to erase the scar which has been left by
the crime.
29 | P a g e
AIR2012SC1608
37
30 | P a g e
32 | P a g e
Appellants most humbly submits that medically Tribhuwan has been declared above 18 and he
has driving license it creates a doubt over academic records and this benefit of this doubt should
be given to prosecution he should also be awarded the same punishment.
This fact should also be kept in minds of court that 3 out of 4 Accused belong to a Powerful
Section and Political Class Families. Getting a fake Matriculation and Birth Certificate is not a
big deal for them. They might have presented forged Documents before the Hon’ble Court so as
to save the accused from higher degree of Punishment.Considering all these relevant facts and
evidences the Counsel humbly asks this court to Judge the Accused not as a juvenile but as a
major Person who has committed such a heinous crime against woman.
40
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 1953 OF 2013
33 | P a g e
Prayer
Wherefore, in the lights of facts stated, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it
is most humbly prayed and implored before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that it may be
graciously pleased to adjudge and declare:
And pass any other order that it may deem fit in the favour of Appellant in ends of equity, justice
& good conscience.
Place: Delhi
34 | P a g e
35 | P a g e