t h

11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

TEAM CODE-91

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Application No. _______ / 2018

(FILLED UNDER THE ______)

{Note: Mention the section/ article under which the jurisdiction of court falls.}

IN THE MATTER OF

MR. PAWAN WASON …APPLICANTS

VERSUS

STATE OF DELHI NCT. ... RESPONDANTS

SUBMISSION BEFORE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF DELHI
HIGH COURT JUDICATURE AT NEW DELHI

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -1-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S. No PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3-3

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 4-4

3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 5-5

4. STATEMENT OF FACTS 6-7

5. ISSUES RAISED 8-8

1. ISSUE 1
2. ISSUE 2
(Issues can be 1 or more, it depends upon the moot preposition as
well.)
6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 9-9

7. ARGUMENTS ADVANCE/WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS 10-16

8. PRAYER 17-17

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -2-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

SC Supreme Court

HC High Court

IPC Indian Penal Code

AIR All India Reporter

Sec. Section

U/S Under Section

SCC Supreme Court Case

FIR First Information Report

UOI Union of India

V/s Versus

CrLj Criminal law journal

Hon’ble Honorable

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -3-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

#) Indian Penal Code

#) Criminal procedure Code

#)www.indiankanoon.in

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -4-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Respondents have approached the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi under the jurisdiction
invoked by the applicant.

The Section 438 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973reads as follows:

Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest.

1. When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of
having committed a non- bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court
of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct
that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.
2. When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub- section (1), it
may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular
case, as it may think fit, including-
(i) A condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) A condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the
Court;
(iv) Such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of section 437, as if the bail
were granted under that section.
(3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an officer in charge of a police
station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of arrest or at any time while in the
custody of such officer to give bail, be shall be released on bail; and if a Magistrate taking
cognizance of such offence decides that a warrant should issue in the first instance against that
person, he shall issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub-
section (1).

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -5-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Mrs. NeelamWason (Complainant), aged – 23 yrs, married to Mr. PawanWason.

DATE OF MARRAIGE - 23rd May 2016 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals.
She has proceeded with a legal complaint against her husband and her In-laws .

2. FIR was lodged by the Complainant (No. 91/18) at Dwarka Police Station.
Accused no. 1 MR. PAWAN WASON (Husband)
Accused no. 2 MR. ANIL WASON (Father In-law)
Accused no.3 MRS. LAXMI ANIL WASON (Mother In-law)
Accused no.4 MRS. NEELA KUMARI (Aunt In-law).

3. The Complainant has been repeatedly harassed mentally and physically and the said
harassment has been taking place since the day of the Complainant’s wedding
ceremony as the food provided in the ceremony was deemed insufficient according to
accused no.2 and 4.

4. The Complainant’s father besides having incurred an expenditure of Rs.3,20,00,000/-

and providing a BMW X6, along with 100 “tolas” of gold as ‘STRIDHAN’ on the above
mentioned wedding ceremony was compelled and tortured to bring in more money.

5. The woman complains that she was harassed mentally and physically by all the four
accused when her father failed to pay an additional amount of Rs. 70,00,000 demanded
by her In- laws.

6. The complainant informed the police that her gold ornaments were deliberately taken
by accused no. 3.

7. It was believed that, Accused no.2 and 4 in collusion, to malign the character of the
complainant and her family, picked petty fights with her, sent her back to her maternal
house and categorically warned the father to keep a check at the misdemeanor, ill
conduct and misbehavior of their daughter.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -6-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

8. The complainant further asserts that Accused No.1 has been physically abusing her as
he found out about her alleged affair in April 2017 with one Mr. Pankaj, brutally beat
her up and assassinated her character as he believed complainant maintained physical
relations with other men, where after he dropped the complainant back to her maternal
house.

9. There was a settlement in between the complainant’s father and her In-laws, thereafter
she was taken back to her matrimonial house on a condition that she would give it in
writing that she would not commit suicide. The complainant refused to give any such
surety in writing where after, she was sent back to her maternal house and was also
asked to stay away from her husband (Accused no. 1).

10. It is further averred by the Complainant that in May 2017, the Accused, fed up with her
constant threats to commit suicide, filed a non-cognizable case against the Complainant
with the Dwarka PS and after settling the dispute in the PS, the complainant was
brought back to her matrimonial house.

11. Also, due to constant disputes and petty arguments between the Complainant and her
In-laws, she along with her husband shifted to a separate flat in Dwarka Sector -12.

12. The complainant also mention that she was physically tortured due to the doubt that
she maintained sexual relationships with other men.

ON 6 December 2017
Accused no. 1 threatened the complainant to kill her as she insisted on going to her niece’s
birthday.
13. The complainant states that after unrequited recurrent quarrels between the couple,
the Accused decided to break all ties with the Complainant after which she was
forcefully driven back to her maternal house and thrown off at Najafgarh Road in 25th
December 2017.

14. The complainant submitted that on the very same day, she received a call from her
Brother-in-Law; one Mr. Manu Anil was on informing her that Accused No.1 has left
their house at Palam leaving behind a letter explaining the same.

15. The complainant has filed an FIR on 27th March 2018 at 14.50.hrs for offences
punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 323, 34, 504, 506 of the IPC, 1860.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -7-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. Whether the anticipatory bail filed by the said accused (HEREIN REFERED AS
MR PAWAN WASAN) is justified?
2. Whether the complainant (HEREIN REFEERD AS MRS. NEELAM WASON)
was being physically and mentally harassed by the said Accused (MR. PAWAN
WASON, MR.ANIL WASON, MRS. LAXMI ANIL WASON, MRS.NEELA
KUMARI) under Sec 498A of IPC?
3. Whether the non cognizable case filed against complainant by the said accused
was justified?

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -8-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. The said accused is justified when he demands for an anticipatory bail and willing to
accept the clauses of anticipatory bail since the complainant has no evidence for mental
& physical harassment done by her in- laws . The fact sheet also asserts that the girl is in
an alleged physical relationship with another man. To justify the above mentioned facts
against the complainant the anticipatory bail should be granted to the said accused.
2. The Council humbly submits that allegations of complainant about the physical and
mental harassment are hoax. The statement of facts shows no such evidence of the above
mentioned statements .This course of action is adopted by the complainant to malign the
character of the said family of accused. It is also asserted by the complainant that the
physical and mental harassment was initiated since the wedding day of the couple, but
the complainant registered the complaint after a considerable gap (i.e. 27th march 2018) .
The complaint could have been filed earlier
3. The non – cognizable bail under section 42 & 43 of CrPc filed against by the said
accused was justified because after being fed up with the constant threats of complainant
to commit suicide . Despite of the fact that after amicable settlement between her father
and her in laws she was taken back to her matrimonial house on a condition that she
would give in writing that she would not commit suicide but the complainant alleged that
after her refusal of the same she was sent back to her maternal house to safeguard their
dignity . This shows the prefixed ideology of complainant to pester the accused .

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -9-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE1.Whether the anticipatory bail filed by the said accused (HEREIN REFERED AS MR
PAWAN WASAN) is justified?]
The counsel humbly submits before the Hon’ble high court of Delhi that anticipatory bail filed
by said accused is completely justified to defasten the false allegations by complainant (Mrs
NEELAM WASAN) . Under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code there is a provision for
a person to seek ‘Anticipatory Bail’. This means that an individual can seek or request to get bail
in anticipation or in expectation of being named or accused of having committed a non-bailable
offence.
Anticipatory bail is meant to be a safeguard for a person who has false accusation or charges
made against him/her, most commonly due to professional or personal enmity, as it ensures the
release of the falsely accused person even before he/she is arrested.
To get anticipatory bail the person seeking it, must approach the Court of Sessions or the High
Court and citing section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as giving proper reason,
apply for it. If the court, based on a number of conditions and the nature of the case, sees merit in
the petition the bail is granted. Hence if and when the person is arrested, he/she will be
immediately released on the basis of the anticipatory bail.
Conditions that are taken into consideration by the court when granting anticipatory bail include,
but are not limited to:
1)The person will make him/herself available for interrogation by the police as and when
required by them
2)The individual shall not directly or indirectly make any threat, promise or offer any bribe to
any person who is connected to the case or knows facts about the case, so as to keep them
quiet or to get them to change their report of facts to the court or the police
3)An assurance that the person shall not leave India without prior permission from the court

According to Landmark Supreme judgement on Anticipatory Bail u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. –

This appeal involves issues of great public importance pertaining to the importance of
individual’s personal liberty and the society’s interest.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -10-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

The society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail because every criminal offence is the
offence against the State. The order granting or refusing bail must reflect perfect balance
between the conflicting interests, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and the interest of the
society. The law of bails dovetails two conflicting interests namely, on the one hand, the
requirements of shielding the society from the hazards of those committing crimes and
potentiality of repeating the same crime while on bail and on the other hand absolute adherence
of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence regarding presumption of innocence of an
accused until he is found guilty and the sanctity of individual liberty
FACTUAL EXPLANATIONS :-
From putting false allegations to putting unwanted quarrel Mrs NEELAM WASAN has left no
coin unturned to .
Potraying wrong image of accused no 2 wherein the gold ornaments were volountarily given by
MrsNeelamWasan.
In reality petty fights and arguments were initiated by MrsNeelanWasan and after getting fed up
with ill1 conduct , misdemeanor and misbehavior Accused no 2 & 4 sent her to her matrimonial
house .
MRS NEELAM WASAN repeatedly conveys that she was continuously physically and
mentally harassed by said accused with MrPawanWasan but ironically she shifted to a
rented accommodation without any objection .
It is also to bring in notice that the alleged relationship of MrsNeelamWasan with MrPankaj
which shows her morality towards her husband and his family.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -11-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

ISSUE 2.2. Whether the complainant (HEREIN REFEERD AS MRS. NEELAM WASON)
was being physically and mentally harassed by the said Accused (MR. PAWAN WASON,
MR.ANIL WASON, MRS. LAXMI ANIL WASON, MRS.NEELA KUMARI) under Sec 498A
of IPC?
The counsel humbly submits before the Hon’ble high court of Delhi thatthe allegations by
complainant are false , she has been using it as a weapon to destroy family’s public image and
gain sympathy in the society . Indian law has earlier also witnessedsuch cases.
Section 498A is used by a female in India to record a criticism against her husband for mental,
bodily, or some other affliction or harassment. It is also referred to as the women’s weapon in
India against the matrimonial cruelty as it's far a cognizable, non-bailable and non-
compoundable offence i.e., the arrest can be made without the warrant and once the arrest is
made bail cannot be guaranteed without the permission of court. The punishment for 498A case
underneath IPC is imprisonment for up to 3 years with fine.
1)Neena Shad vsMcd on 2 November, 2010
As regards petitioner Sunil Chaudhary, aforesaid facts show that he actively assisted petitioner
Neena Shad in creating nuisance at her workplace. Petitioner Sunil Chaudhary picked up a fight
with Dr.VidyaSagar Sharma and thereby he and petitioner Neena Shad foisted a false case of
sexual harassment against him. He also adopted a most uncooperative and obstructive attitude
with the Committee. He terrorized KeshavDass into stating lies before the Committee. He along
with petitioner Neena Shad misbehaved with the dispatch rider.
The punishment for 498A case underneath IPC is imprisonment for up to 3 years with fine.
However, in the past few years, the cases of misuse of section 498A and fake 498A cases
have extended! ladies have began misusing this law as a device for getting out of a wedlock
2)Sarithavs R. Ramachandra
9 July, 2002
Andhra High Court
ORDER B.S.A. Swamy, J.

Wife refuses to live with husband in spite of husband & Hon. Court taking every effort to save
the marriage. Court even request the couple to stay at a resort for a week, wife returns from the
stay, says enjoyed her time, but still wants divorce. Then wife files a false 498a which the court
openly condemns.

PUNISHMENT FOR MISUSE OF SEC 498A CAN BE :-

Section 193, IPC: Punishment for false evidence

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -12-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates
false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years,
and shall also be liable to fine, and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in
any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 211, IPC: False charge of offence made with intent to injure

Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any
criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an
offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that
person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend
to two years, or with fine, or with both;

and if such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with
death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for seven years or upwards, shall be punishable
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall
also be liable to fine

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -13-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

FACTUAL EXPLANATIONS :-
1)The statement of facts shows no such evidence of harassment against the woman .
2)This is a clear use of sec 498A to malign the character of the said family of accused.
3)It is also asserted by the complainant that the physical and mental harassment was initiated
since the wedding day of the couple, but the complainant registered the complaint after a
considerable gap (i.e. 27th march 2018) . The complaint could have been filed earlier.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -14-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

ISSUE 3.3. Whether the non cognizable case filed against complainant by the said accused
was justified?
The counsel humbly submits that the non cognizable case filed against complainant by
MrPawanWasanieMrsNeelamWasan was absolutely justified to protect himself from the
constant threats of the latter. The way in whivh the incidents were being potrayed by the
complainant her single attempt to commit suicide could have landed MrWasan into legal matter
which is the sole objective of MrsWasan.
Cognisable offence and non-cognisable offence are classifications of crime used in the legal
system of India,[1] Sri Lanka, Bangladesh,[2] and Pakistan.[3] Non-cognizable offences includes
misbehavior, public annoyance etc. In general non-cognizable offences are bailable and placed
under First Schedule of IPC.By contrast, in the case of a non-cognisable offence, a police officer
does not have the authority to make an arrest without a warrant and an investigation cannot be
initiated without a court order. The police can file a First Information Report (FIR) only for
cognisable offences.

Procedure
The Section 154 in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 of India states:

Every information relating to the commission of a cognisable offence, if given orally to an

officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and
be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced
to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be
entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe
in this behalf.
A copy of the information as recorded under sub-section (1) shall be given forthwith, free of
cost, to the informant.
Any person aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station to record
the information referred to in sub-section (1) may send the substance of such information, in
writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if satisfied that such
information discloses the commission of a cognisable offence, shall either investigate the case
himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the
manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the powers of an officer in charge
of the police station in relation to that offence.[8]
In the case of 2007(9) ADJ 478 Allahabad High Court, Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State of
U.P. and another the case was originally registered under sections 307 I.P.C. and after
investigation non-cognizable offence punishable under section 504 I.P.C. was found. Therefore,

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -15-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

charge sheet submitted for offence punishable under section 504 I.P.C. was held to be
complainant under section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.

In the case of Alok Kumar ShuklaVs. State of U.P. and another mentioned above police
submitted charge sheet in non-cognizable offence without order of Magistrate under section
155(2) Cr.P.C. Therefore charge sheet submitted by police was held to be complaint under
section 2(d) of Cr.P.C.
FACTUAL EXPLANATION :-
1) Despite of the fact that after amicable settlement between her father and her in laws she was
taken back to her matrimonial house on a condition that she would give in writing that she would
not commit suicide but the complainant alleged that after her refusal of the same she was sent
back to her maternal house to safeguard their dignity . This shows the prefixed ideology of
complainant to pester the accused.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -16-

 t h
11 FIMT INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

PRAYER

In the light of the issue raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, the counsel for the
applicant humbly and forever pray before the Hon’ble court to kindly

ACCEPT THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL

AND/OR

PASS ANY OTHER ORDER THAT IS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE,

EQUALITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.

And for this the Applicant is duty bound shall forever humblypray.

Place:

Date:

(Counsel for the Applicant)

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPLICANTS -17-