NALANDA LAW COLLEGE MOOT COURT TRIAL

FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2022-2023

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE NALANDA LAW COLLEGE TRIAL MOOT COURT

IN THE MATTER OF –

STATE & OTHERS MR AMITABH,MR SHASHI,MR RAJESH

(PETITIONER) V. (RESPONDENT)

{UNDER SECTION 307AND 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860}

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

NALANDA LAW COLLEGE MOOT COURT TRIAL PAGE | 1
MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [STATEMENT OF ISSUES]

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

ISSUE I

AS ALL ACCUSED INTENTIONALLY CAME TO KILL PLAINTIFF WITH KNIFE.

ISSUE II

AS ACCUSED CREATED PUBLIC NUISANCE.

ISSUE III

AS ACCUSED CARRIED SHARP WEAPON WITH HIM AND USED IT PUBLIC PLACES WHICH CREATED

FEAR IN PEOPLE’S MIND.

NALANDA LAW COLLEGE MOOT COURT TRIAL PAGE | 2

MEMORANDUM for PETITIONER [SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS]

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. A JUDGE WHO HAS EXPRESSED OPINION AS PART OF THE REFERRING

BENCH, OUGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LARGER BENCH

A judge who has expressed opinion as part of the referring bench, ought to participate in the
larger bench because inclusion of the judges of referring bench in the larger bench is the rule
of the court and there is no provision or reasonable ground for non-inclusion. Prejudging the
same question of law does not bar inclusion in a larger bench. Non-inclusion is provided for
only in case of bias, and there is no question of bias in participation of judge in larger bench.
Additionally, US Court procedures have time and again elucidated the advantages of inclusion
of judge in the larger bench; which is an effective guiding principle.

II. THE MASTER OF ROSTER MUST BE DEEMED TO INCLUDE FIVE SENIOR-

MOST JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT

The master of roster must be deemed to include five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court
becausethe exercise of power of ‘Master of Roster’ by Chief Justice in his individual capacity,
violates the principle of nemo judex in causa sua. Furthermore, such wide discretionary power
in the hands of the Chief Justice alone is against the rule of law and a potential threat to the
independence of the Judiciary. There is an urgent need to replace the ‘Master of Roster’ with
the Collegium system so that collective wisdom can be applied to make the process more
effective. Also, the examination of constitutional scheme and the objective behind inclusion
suggests incorporation of collegium system.

III. SUPREME COURT SHOULD REGULATE THE FEES OF THE LAWYERS

Supreme Court should regulate the fees of the lawyers because there is requirement of the
guidelines for the same. Exorbitant fees charged by lawyers amounts to denial of acces to
justice. Such unreasonably high fees create hindrance and thereby violate fundamental rights
and state policy. Such a regulation is reasonable and not violative of Art. 19(1)(g) of the
Mayeechin Constitution. Power to lay guidelines is under the rule making power of the
Supreme Court. Article 145 is wide enough to empower the Court to lay down guidelines on

NALANDA LAW COLLEGE MOOT COURT TRIAL PAGE |