Prosecution

Team Code: TC – 27P
THE ICFAI LAW SCHOOL, DEHRADUN INTRA – TRIAL ADVOCACY

COMPETITION, 2020
Before,
The Hon’ble Sessions Court of Wasseypur, Pachim Pradesh
(Filed under Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)
State of Pachim Pradesh …Prosecution
v.
Atapi, Sartaj, & Vatapi …Defence
For the offences charged u/s 498-A, 34, 120-B, 304-B 306, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
Humbly submitted by the counsels

appearing on behalf of the
Prosecution
THE ICFAI LAW SCHOOL, DEHRADUN INTRA – TRIAL ADVOCACY COMPETITION, 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………..……………..4
Index of Authorities……………………………………………………………………………….5
Cases……………………………………………………………………………………....5
Books……………………………………………………………………………………...6
Journals…………………………………………………………………………………....6
Lexicons…………………………………………………………………………………...7
Online Resources.................................................................................................................7
Statutes…………………………………………………………………………………….7
Statement of Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………………………..8
Statement of Facts…………………………………………………………………………………9
Statement of Charges.....................................................................................................................10
Statement of Issues........................................................................................................................11
Summary of Arguments.................................................................................................................12
Arguments Advanced.....................................................................................................................13
Issue 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY
AGAINST THE DECEASED?......................................................................................................13
[1.1] That the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused………….……………………..14
[1.1.1] That there was Mens Rea present in the case of the Accused. …………………..……….16
[1.1.2] That there was Actus Reus present in the case of the Accused…………………………..16
[1.2] That the accused fulfill all the essentials to be convicted u/s 498A of IPC. …………….....17
[1.2.1] That the mens rea and actus reus in this present case also constitute an offence u/s 304-B
Page | 2
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION
of IPC……………………………………………………………………………………………..17
Issue 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS
SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT THE DECEASED COMMITTED SUICIDE ……………...18
[2.1] That the medical evidence in the present case does not point towards a suicid.....................19
[2.1.1] That the strangulation which led to the Asphyxia was homicidal and not
suicidal...........................................................................................................................................20
[2.2] That the investigation carried out by the police was grossly incompetent.............................21
[2.2.1] That the police were grossly wrong in not examining the fingerprints...............................22
[2.2.2] That the suicide note which was recovered is completely inconclusive.............................23
[2.2.3] That the suicide note cannot be termed as Dying Declaration............................................23
Issue 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE
DECEASED?.................................................................................................................................24
[3.1] Whether the accused an intention to commit the murder.......................................................24
[3.2] Whether the accused did a criminal conspiracy with common intention to execute the
offence?..........................................................................................................................................25
[3.3] Whether the acts and offences of the accused may also be charged as Dowry
Death..............................................................................................................................................27
Prayer...........................................................................................................................................................28
Page | 3
TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS
A.C. Appeal cases

AIR All India Reporter
All. Allahabad
Bom. Bombay
C.J. Chief Justice
C.L.J. Cambridge Law Journal
Cal. Calcutta
Cr LJ Criminal Law Journal
CrPC Code of Criminal Procedure
Ed. Edition
Etc. Etcetera
IPC Indian Penal Code
J&K Jammu and Kashmir
Ker. Kerela
Mad. Madras
p. Page Number
PW Prosecution Witness
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SCR Supreme Court Reporter
u/s Under Section
UOI Union Of India
v. Versus
Page | 4
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
CASES
Name Citation Page

Annamalai v. Inspector Of Police, Madras High Court, 2017 SCC OnLine 23
Mad 12576
Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana AIR 2010 SC 2839 16
Ch Narender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2000 CriLJ 4068 14
(Andhra Pradesh)
Dayaram v. State, (1986) 3 Crimes 446 17
Deepak Revachand Talreja vs. State of Maharashtra MANU/MH/0579/2007 19
Gurpreet Singh v. State of Haryana AIR 2002 SC 3217 25
Hari Om v. State Of Uttar Pradesh, (1993) 1 Crimes 294 23
(SC)
Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 2006 SC 680 16
Jadunath Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1971 SC 363 18
Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union Of India (2018) 1 SCC 809 25
Kans Raj v. State of Punjab AIR 2000 SC 2324 15
Kehar Singh & Ors. v. The State (Delhi Admn.) AIR 1988 SC 1883 24
King v. King (1953) A.C. 124 12
Krishan Lal v. Union of India 1994 Cr LJ 2472 14
(P&H)
Mandhari v. State of Chattisgarh (2002) 4 SCC 308 19
Mohan Rani v. Mohal Lal AIR 1965 J&K 88 13
Nanhar v. State of Haryana 2010 Cr LJ 2450 22
Noorjahan v. State AIR 2006 SC 2131 13
Pancho v. Ram Prasad AIR 1956 All. 41 13
R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 SCR 9 23
Rajamal & Others v. State 1993 CriLJ 3029 14
(Mad) (PB)
Page | 5
Ram Narain Popli v. Central Bureau Of Investigation (2003) 3 SCC 641 24

Sanku Sreedharan Kottukallil v. State Of Kerala, AIR 1970 Ker 98 23
State of Orissa v. Ajun Das, AIR 1999 SC 3229 23
Suresh Chandra Sanyal v. Emperor (1912) 39 Cal 606. 21
Suvetha v. State (2009) 6 SCC 757 11
Vinitha Saxena v. Pankaj Pandit (2006) 3 SCC 778 13
Waikhom Yaima Singh v. State of Manipal 2011 Cr LJ 2673 22
BOOKS REFFERED
1. B.B. MITRA, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, 20th Ed., 2006

2. BATUK LAL, The Law of Evidence, 18th Ed. 2010, Allahabad Law Agency
3. HALSBURY LAWS OF INDIA, Vol. 5(1) & 5(2)
4. JAISINGH P. MODI, Modi‟s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, 23 rd Ed., 2009,
LexisNexis
5. P.M. BAKSHI, Basu‟s Law of Evidence, 7th Ed., 2003, India Law House
6. PARAS DIWAN, Modern Hindu Law, 9th Ed., 1993, Allahabad Law Agency
7. R.V.KELKAR, Criminal Procedure, 5th Ed. 2011, Eastern Book Co.
8. RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, Criminal Procedure Code,1973, 2010, LexisNexis
9. RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, Indian Penal Code, 33rd Ed. 2010, LexisNexis.
10. RATANLAL & DHIRAJLAL, The Law of Evidence, 25th Ed. 2013, LexisNexis.
JOURNALS
1. Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 72. ISSN: 0008-1973

2. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Volume 120 No. 5 2018
3. Journal of Forensic Science and Criminal Investigation, ISSN: 2476-1311
4. Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine Jan-March 2013, Vol. 35, No. 1, ISSN: 0974-0848
5. Indian Medical Gazette, June 1889
Page | 6
LEXICON
1. BRYAN A. GARNER, Black‟s Law Dictionary, , 7th Edition, 1999, West Publication Co.
2. HENRY CAMPBELL BLACK, Black‟s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, 1968, West Publication
Co.
3. P RAMANATHA AIYAR, The Law Lexicon, 2nd Edition, 2006
ONLINE RESOURCES
1. SCC Online
2. Manupatra
3. AIR Online
4. WestLaw India
STATUTES
1. Indian Penal Code, 1860

2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
3. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
4. Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
Page | 7
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The counsel humbly submits that this Hon‟ble Court has the jurisdiction to try this case by virtue
of Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The said enactment states that “Every offence shall ordinarily inquired into and tried by a Court
within whose local jurisdiction it was committed.”
Page | 8
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Kukko was the daughter of Ramadhir Singh, who was a resident of the town Wasseypur,
Pachim Pradesh. She was married to Atapi on 15/04/2010, who was also a resident of
Wasseypur.
2. Soon after Kukko‟s marriage, Ramadhir lodged an FIR because he came to know that
Atapi, his brother Vatapi, his father Sartaj, and mother Namita started harassing, beating
and demanding money as Dowry from Kukko on a regular basis. Kukko was also not
allowed to use the phone, even when she did, the in-laws used to keep an eye on her.
When anyone tried contacting her, the family made plenty of excuses, and finally if she
got to talk to anyone, the in-laws used to listen to her conversation. She was also
alienated from all family functions, and did not enjoy any lavish lifestyle of the family.
3. On 25/05/2016, Ramdhir filed an FIR when he received a call from an unknown caller,
stating that his daughter Kukko (hereinafter as „the deceased‟) had died. Further, on that
day, he received a suicide letter of his daughter from Vatapi.
4. One of the neighbours mentioned that she never heard any sound which may indicate a
sign of quarrel in the family. Even after 6 years of marriage, the family never forced
Kukko for any child. Kukko managed all the household chores by herself. She also stated
that a lot of male and female friends visited the residence.
5. The FIR 786/16 u/s 304-B was lodged at Mahesh Nagar Police Station. Police submitted
the Charge sheet u/s 498-A, 302, 304-B, and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on
29/07/2016 along with a certain number of exhibits.
Page | 9
STATEMENT OF CHARGES
 Atapi has been charged under Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B, & 306 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, for the crime of committing cruelty against his wife, murdering his wife,
causing dowry death, and abetting towards her suicide.
 Sartaj has been charged under Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B, & 306 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, for the crime of committing cruelty against his daughter-in-law, murdering
his daughter-in-law, causing dowry death, and abetting towards her suicide.
 Vatapi has been charged under Sections 498-A, 302, 304-B, & 306 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, for the crime of committing cruelty against his brother‟s wife, murdering his
brother‟s wife, causing dowry death, and abetting towards her suicide.
Page | 10
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
ISSUE 1
WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY AGAINST THE
DECEASED?
ISSUE 2
WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS
SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT THE DECEASED COMMITTED SUICIDE?
ISSUE 3
WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE DECEASED?
Page | 11
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY

AGAINST THE DECEASED?
It is humbly submitted before the Hon‟ble court, that the deceased herein had been subjected to
cruelty after her marriage. The accused committed acts of physical and mental cruelty on the
deceased and even demanded dowry from her. The accused had the requisite of actus reus and
mens rea to commit said crime. Hence, it was proved beyond the reasonable doubt and therefore
it was subjected to cruelty under section 498-A IPC,1860.
ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS

It is humbly submitted before the Hon‟ble court, Firstly that the medical evidence does not point
towards a suicide as the death of deceased had happened because of homicidal strangulation, and
not because of a simple suicide. Secondly, that the investigation carried out by the police was
completely inconclusive. Therefore, the instances were sufficient to prove that the deceased
committed suicide.
ISSUE 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE DECEASED?
It is humbly submitted before the Hon‟ble court that the accused are guilty of murder as they had
intention to kill her. The accused had the required mens rea and actus reus and they even had a
motive to carry out the said act. Hence it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the crime of
Murder was indeed committed by the accused in the case at hand.
Page | 12
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY

AGAINST THE DECEASED?
The Counsel for the Prosecution most humbly submits before this Hon‟ble Court that the present
case presents an opportunity in-front of this court to properly interpret the limits of the law
pertaining to cruelty committed against a woman by her husband and/or his family members.
This case also provides for an opportunity to this Court to do justice to a grieving family who
had just lost their daughter to a bunch of immoral humans and also to ease their pain by
providing for the strictest and the most appropriate punishment which the accused deserve.
It is submitted that the accused Atapi (hereinafter as „A1‟), Sartaj (hereinafter as „A2‟), and
Vatapi (hereinafter as „A3‟) are guilty for committing the offence of cruelty against the deceased
Mrs. Kukko (hereinafter as „the deceased‟), and the facts which shall be presented before the
Hon‟ble Court shall point towards the same. It is hereby mentioned that the punishment for
committing cruelty by husband or relative of husband of a woman is mentioned in Section 498-A
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter as „IPC‟). The basic ingredients for constituting a
crime under Section 498-A were listed down in the case Suvetha v. State1. These guidelines
are:-
1. The woman must be married.
2. She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and
3. Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by husband of the woman or by
the relative of her husband.
This section has given a new dimension to the concept of cruelty for the purposes of matrimonial
remedies. 2 It is evident from the facts given above in this document as well as the “Proposition”
that the deceased was married to A1.3 Hence, the first essential of the crime has been very well
1
(2009) 6 SCC 757
2
Shobha Rani v. Madhukar Reddi, AIR 1988 SC 121
3
2nd line of the Proposition; Statement of Facts in this Document, Point 1.
Page | 13
established in this case. Moving on, the further essentials shall be established as the argument
proceeds forward.
[1.1] That the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused.
The laws in India, howsoever strict they are, fail to establish a proper one-liner definition for
cruelty. It is said that the acts or the conduct constituting cruelty can be so numerous and varied
that it would be impossible to fit them into any water tight compartments. 4 Black‟s Law
Dictionary defines cruelty as:-
"Cruelty" as the intentional and malicious infliction of physical suffering upon

living creatures particularly human beings or, as applied to the latter, the
wanton, malicious and unnecessary infliction of pain upon the body or the feeling
and emotions".
The general rule in all questions of cruelty is that the whole matrimonial relations must be
considered, and that rule is of special value when the cruelty consists not of violent acts but of
injurious reproaches, complaints, accusation or taunts. Willful accusations may be made which
are not true and for which there are no probable grounds, and yet they may not amount to cruelty.
To take an obvious example, they may have been provoked by the cruel conduct of the other
spouse. There is in many cases no easy rule, no clear line of demarcation which divides cruelty
from something which does not amount to cruelty”.5
In the given case, the deceased was not only subjected to physical cruelty, but mental harassment
in many forms as well. The statement of facts very well describe that Kukko was not allowed to
use the phone or to talk to anyone. When she did, her in-laws used to keep out an eye on her.6
Such kind of overt acts necessarily classify as an infringement of her privacy, and a mental
nuisance for her. The Supreme Court has even agreed that even mental torture or abnormal
behavior may amount to cruelty or harassment in certain cases. 7
4
Paras Diwan, Modem Hindu Law p. 141, (9th ed., 1993)
5
King v. King, (1953) A.C. 124
6
Statement of Facts in this Document, Point 2
7
Gananth Pattanaik v. State of Orissa, (2002) 2 SCC 619
Page | 14
Upon glancing over the Investigation Report which was submitted u/s 173 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter as „CrPC‟), the police in their findings have clearly
mentioned that after the marriage, the deceased was totally changed and she was tortured daily
by her in-laws and husband. Even her friends stated that the environment of the house was not
good as all the family members never used to talk to the deceased and made her do a lot of
household work.8 Such kind of behaviour by the family members definitely amounts to cruelty,
because she was literally burdened with work all day, and wasn‟t left out with any mental peace
at all.
If the given facts aren‟t enough, the second witness for the prosecution, the mother of the
deceased, Kusum (hereinafter as „PW2‟), in her testimony has stated that after the marriage,
Kukko became quiet, and sometimes she used to call and cry for hours without uttering a single
word. 9 Even the father of the deceased, Ramadhir (hereinafter as „PW1‟) has stated that his
daughter was being harassed at her in-laws home.10 Given all the circumstances, even though
evidence not being bundled, it clearly shows that Kukko was being harassed cruelly at her in-
laws home. What constitutes mental cruelty will not depend upon the numerical count of such
incidents or only on the continuous course of such conduct, but really go by the intensity, gravity
and stigmatic impact of it when meted out even once and deleterious effect of it in the mental
attitude, necessary for maintaining a conducive matrimonial home.11
The conduct demeanour and treatment by such party that may raise an apprehension in the mind
of the aggrieved party, that his or her physical or mental health would be adversely affected; this
shall constitute cruelty even if no physical maltreatment is proved or alleged. 12 Even the factors
which affect the health of the wife, even if there is no physical violence amounts to cruelty.13
The consequences of cruelty which drive a woman to commit suicide, or cause grave injury,
danger to life, limb, or health are the reasons to attract this section. 14
8
Exhibit-6: Investigation Report, pt. 14
9
Exhibit-5: Statements of Witnesses u/s 161 Crpc, 3rd Witness: Kusum
10
Exhibit-1: First Information Report: pt. 14
11
Vinitha Saxena v. Pankaj Pandit, (2006) 3 SCC 778
12
Mohan Rani v. Mohal Lal, AIR 1965 J&K 88
13
Pancho v. Ram Prasad, AIR 1956 All. 41
14
Noorjahan v. State AIR 2006 SC 2131
Page | 15
Given all the present facts and circumstances of the present case, it won‟t be wrong to admit that
the instances and the testimony of the witnesses clearly state that the deceased was residing in a
hostile environment, and all the acts against her by the in-laws definitely amount to cruelty.
[1.1.1] That there was Mens Rea present in the case of the Accused.
According to Black‟s Law Dictionary, Mens Rea is a guilty mind; a guilty or wrongful purpose;
a criminal intent.15
The intent to injure is the most important element of cruelty contemplated under Section 498A. 16
The sole constituent of the offence under Section 498A is 'cruelty' which mean wilful conduct.
The word wilful contemplates obstinate and deliberate behaviour on the part of the offender for it
to amount to cruelty. Thus 'Mens rea' is an essential ingredient of the offence.17 The requirement
of proving that soon before her death the woman was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her
husband or any relation of her husband for or in connection with any demand of dowry clearly
shows that the legislature has imbibed the necessary mens rea for the offence of dowry death. 18
The present case presents a number of instances which clearly prove that the accused had a guilty
mind while committing cruelty against the deceased. At the very onset, the first FIR which was
filed by PW1 soon after the marriage of the deceased was because she was being harassed by her
in-laws, as well as being assaulted because of their demands for dowry. Apart from this, the in-
laws also never let her talk to anybody, or even let anyone easily visit the deceased. They even
never allowed her to use the phone to talk to anybody, be it friends or family. On top of all of
that, the accused used to sit and listen whenever she used to talk to anyone. This clearly shows a
guilty mind on their part because the assault was solely for the purpose of demanding dowry.
Hence, the accused have proper mens rea on their part to be guilty of committing cruelty u/s
498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
[1.1.2] That there was Actus Reus present in the case of the Accused.
15
Henry Campbell Black, Black‟s Law Dictionary, p. 1157, 4 th Edition, 1968, West Publication Co.
16
Rajamal & Others v. State, 1993 CriLJ 3029 (Mad) (PB)
17
Ch Narender Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2000 CriLJ 4068 (Andhra Pradesh)
18
Krishan Lal v. Union of India, 1994 Cr LJ 2472 (P&H)
Page | 16
The Supreme Court has observed that in-laws of a deceased cannot be roped in only on the
ground of being close relatives of the husband of the deceased. Some overt act must be attributed
to them in the incident and the same should also be proved beyond reasonable doubt.19
The „overt act‟, which the Supreme Court talks about in the Kans Raj case can be clearly
attributed to here, as there is a plethora of evidence to show that there was a lot of cruelty meted
out on the deceased by the accused. The facts of the case clearly state that the deceased was
constantly taunted and assaulted in the demands on dowry. If beating isn‟t evidence enough for
this court to determine that there was an overt act, PW2 in her testimony has also stated that the
deceased used to call and cry for hours.20 Even the police in their Investigation Report have
stated that she was tortured daily by her in-laws, and her mother found burn marks on her neck
and body.21 Examining all the evidence present before this Hon‟ble Court, it won‟t be wrong to
justify that there is enough Actus Reus on part of the accused to commit this crime.
[1.2] That the accused fulfill all the essentials to be convicted u/s 498A of IPC.
After looking at all the arguments presented by the Prosecution, especially under [1.1.1] &
[1.1.2], it would be correct on the part of this Hon‟ble Court to adjudge that the accused are
guilty under Section 498A of the IPC. The arguments above clearly prove with citations from the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India that the accused have both the mens rea and actus reus to
commit this crime. Apart from this, the accused also fulfill all the ingredients which were laid
down in Suvetha‟s22 case.
 The accused did commit cruelty against the deceased. [1.1]

 The accused had the necessary intention to commit the said offence. [1.1.1]
 The accused did overt acts which clearly prove their offence. [1.1.2]
Considering all the above-mentioned facts, it is clear that the accused are guilty under Section
498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
19
Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, AIR 2000 SC 2324
20
Supra, note 9
21
22
Supra, note 1
Page | 17
[1.2.1] That the mens rea and actus reus in this present case also constitute an offence u/s 304-B
of IPC.
One of the key ingredients to constitute a crime under section 304-B of IPC is that the victim was
subjected to cruelty either by the husband and/or by any relative of the husband, and such cruelty
or harassment was in connection with the demand of dowry. 23 It is also a necessary essential that
such cruelty or harassment was made soon before her death.24
The expression „soon before her death‟ cannot be given a restricted or narrower meaning. They
must be understood in their plain language and with reference to their meaning in common
parlance. These are the provisions relating to human behaviour, and, therefore, cannot be given
such a narrower meaning, which would defeat the very purpose of the provisions of the act. Of
course, these are the penal provisions and must receive their strict construction. But, even the
rule of strict construction requires that the provisions have to be read in conjunction with other
relevant provisions and scheme of the act.25 Further, the interpretation given should be one which
would avoid absurd results on the one hand and would further the object and cause of the law so
enacted on the other.26
Henceforth, no exact time may be established by law to deal with this „cruelty‟ however, in the
present case, the cruelty meted out was throughout the time. She was never allowed to use the
phone, talk to anyone privately, meet any person etc. It was also clearly stated that her A1 used
to check her mobile phone on a constant basis, and never respected her privacy27.
Therefore, in the light of the present facts and circumstances, it won‟t be wrong to adjudge that
the accused did indeed have the mental intention of causing cruelty to the deceased. Hence, they
fall perfectly fit in some of the ingredients of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS

23
Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 2006 SC 680
24
Ibid.
25
Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, p. 688 (34th ed., 2014)
26
Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana, AIR 2010 SC 2839
27
Supra, note 21
Page | 18
It is humbly submitted before this Hon‟ble Court that all the evidence which has been collected
throughout the period of investigation isn‟t sufficient to suffice that the Deceased had committed
suicide. The Police in their Investigation Report have clearly stated that the cause of death of the
deceased was suicide,28 while they have clearly failed to appreciate and investigate a number of
key points in the investigation which may have proved otherwise. The Post-Mortem report is
also inconclusive, because the medical examiner has failed to conclusively rule that what kind of
death this was. The counsel appearing for the Prosecution shall humbly take this Court through
the evidences and prove that the death of the Deceased was not because of Suicide.
According to Black‟s Law Dictionary, suicide is defined as the act of taking one‟s own life. 29 A
Post-Mortem report is the examination of a body after death. 30 In the present case, the post
mortem report (hereinafter as „report‟) states that the Asphyxia happened due to ante-mortem
hanging. 31 Ante-Mortem means before the death.32 This simply means that the accused was alive
before the hanging, and does not conclude anything. Other than this fact, the post mortem report
is absolutely silent on matters of the death. This is highly irregular on the part of the Medical
Examiner because a post mortem report is undoubtedly a very important document, which not
only aids the medical officer in determining the nature of the injuries during their evidence in the
trial, but also helps the court in appreciating the evidence in the case. 33 It is a proven fact that
Asphyxia isn‟t caused only by suicidal hanging. It is equally caused because of homicidal
strangulation. As long as a body is strangulated, asphyxia is most likely to happen.34 Therefore,
the presumption and the conclusion of the Police Report that the deceased committed suicide is
not concrete.
[2.1] That the medical evidence in the present case does not point towards a suicide.
In the present case, the testimony of the witness clearly shows that every person in the house was
clearly ignorant of the fact that the dead body of the deceased had already started to smell foul.
28
29
Bryan A. Garner, Black‟s Law Dictionary, p. 1447, 7th Edition, 1999, West Publication Co.
30
P. Ramanatha Aiyer, The Law Lexicon, p. 1485, Reprint 2004, Wadhwa Nagpur
31
Exhibit-3: Post Mortem Report, Paragraph after pt. 2
32
Henry Campbell Black, Black‟s Law Dictionary, p. 118, 4th Edition, 1968, West Publication Co.
33
Dayaram v. State, (1986) 3 Crimes 446
34
K. Matiharan & Amrit Patnaik, Modi‟s Medical Jurisprudence & Toxicology, p. 565-599, (23rd ed., 2009)
Page | 19
No one in their testimony had stated that they smelled something foul, their day to day life was
happening as usual, which definitely shows something wrong on their part. According to the
report, death occurred before 14:40 hours of the conclusion of the post mortem. The post mortem
concluded at 15:30 hours35, hence, the approximate time of death would be around 12:50 AM in
the midnight. The body was discovered at about 10:00 AM in the morning, which would mean
that around 8 hours had passed since the death.
After the death of a person, it takes approximately 5 hours and 50 minutes for the foul smell to
evolve. 36 Keeping that in mind, the body must‟ve started smelling at around 7‟o clock in the
morning. Still, the accused never made a mention of it in their statements. This shows that either
the accused were too negligent of their surroundings, or that they had prior knowledge of the fact
that this was about to happen.
Upon examination of the report, it is clear that the report has missed some clear portions, which,
if examined, would‟ve been more conclusive in determining the cause of death. The report has
missed out exact portions and measurements of injuries, state of hands whether clenched or not,
and examination of the brain. In the case Jadunath Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh37¸ where
the above said details were missed, the court conclusively ruled that suicide was not believable.
[2.1.1] That the strangulation which led to the Asphyxia was homicidal and not suicidal.
Upon discussion over the prior argument that no foul smell was observed by the accused, the
question automatically arises that whether they knew about this the whole time or not. Now, as to
the next finding, we find that the Post Mortem Report shows nowhere that there was presence of
saliva of any kind on the mouth of the deceased.
Upon research conducted by a few resident doctors of Government Medical College, Bhavnagar,
Gujarat, they found that dribbling of saliva was present in some cases of hanging but not present
in any case of ligature strangulation. Dribbling of saliva was present in 38.37% cases of hanging
but not present in any cases of ligature strangulation. Hanging did not show any peri-ligature
injuries 38 around the ligature marks, while in all cases of ligature strangulation peri-ligature
35
Exhibit-3: Post Mortem Report, Last Paragraph
36
Mackenzie, Indian Medical Gazette, June 1889, p. 167
37
AIR 1971 SC 363
38
Injuries found near the Ligature Mark.
Page | 20
injuries were present around ligature mark, dribbling of saliva is sure sign of hanging having
taken place during life. 39
Further, in the case of Deepak Revachand Talreja vs. State of Maharashtra 40, it was clarified
that what kinds of things happens to a body when it is strangulated. The ligature mark is
transverse. The neck is stretched or elongated in the case of hanging, but not in the case of
strangulation. Saliva runs out of the mouth in hanging, but not in strangulation. Considering the
above mentioned circumstances, the report clearly states that the neck is not stretched or
elongated.
In Mandhari v. State of Chattisgarh 41 – the appellant himself reported the commission of

suicide of her wife, whereas the post report showed that there was a ligature mark on the neck of
deceased which was ante mortem. The doctor‟s opinion was clear and definite that such ligature
mark can‟t be caused by hanging but could have been caused by strangulation. Relating this to
the present case, report shows that the ligature mark was ante-mortem but it was not definitely
proved that it was strangulation. But it can be inferred from the various facts and medical
evidences that it has been ignored or missed.Where the examiner conducting the post mortem
isn‟t examined, the same cannot be used as substantive evidence. 42
Hence, looking at all the medical evidence which is present here before this Hon‟ble Court, it
won‟t be wrong to conclude that the death of the deceased had happened because of homicidal
strangulation, and not because of a simple suicide.
[2.2] That the investigation carried out by the police was grossly incompetent.
If we claim to be one of the prominent democracies in the world, then, those in-charge
of investigation of crimes and bringing the guilty to book have an important role to play. They
are but supplementing and supporting the State in implementing and putting into practice the
43
constitutional principles.
39
Mohammed Musaib M. Shaikh et al., A Study of Gross Postmortem Findings in Cases of Hanging and Ligature
Strangulation, J Indian Acad Forensic Med. Jan-March 2013, Vol. 35, No. 1, p. 63-65
40
MANU/MH/0579/2007
41
(2002) 4 SCC 308
42
Dayaram v. State, (1986) 3 Crimes 446, 451 (All.); See Also: Halsbury Laws of India, Vol. 5(1) & 5(2)
43
2018 SCC OnLine Bom 16909
Page | 21
While investigating a crime scene, there are some key points which the investigator should
follow, these are:- 1. Detailed investigation of crime scene, 2. Recording of complete series of
photographs, 3. Examination of scene of hanging (in undisturbed condition) and post analysis of
hanging features, 4. Examination of rope and direction of fibers, 5. Examination of loop, noose,
knot and cut mark, 6. Examination of the hanging material other than rope, 7. Examination of
44
fixing position of hanging material (point of suspension).
While looking at the facts and merits of the case, we see that a few essentials which were
mentioned above have been clearly left out. Looking at pt. 3 stated above, the police never got a
chance to examine the scene of hanging undisturbed. When the police arrived, they found the
45
body lying on the ground with marks on the neck. Hence, the police clearly missed out an
opportunity to examine the body, and the crime scene was clearly contaminated by the accused.
[2.2.1] That the police were grossly wrong in not examining the fingerprints.
When looking at the submissions which the police did before this court, the Spot Panchnama
clearly states that the dust on top of the fan blades clearly showed some intact finger prints.46 The
science of fingerprint identification has reached a stage of perfection and thus assumes a
significant role in the day to day administration of justice. 47
Presence of fingerprint at the scene of occurrence is a positive evidence. But the absence is not
enough to foreclose the presence of the accused. Therefore, the presence of fingerprint itself is a
positive sign that the accused was present at the scene of the crime. 48
Therefore, not examining the fingerprints which were found on the fan blades is a gross mistake
on the point of the police. The presence of fingerprints on the top of the fan itself proves that
there was someone other at the scene as well, therefore ruling out the possibility of suicide.
Hence, ruling this as a suicide gets even tougher in presence of all the evidence before this court.
44
Ajitesh P, H Pratihari. Suicide or Homicide. J 002 Forensic Sci & Criminal Inves. 2017; 3(3): 555615.
DOI: 10.19080/JFSCI.2017.03.555615
45
Exhibit-2: Spot Panchnama, pt. 4, 2nd paragraph
46
Ibid.
47
K. Subhashree & K. Rojha, An Analytical Study on Identity of Finger Print with Expert Opinion, International
Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Volume 120 No. 5 2018, 1033-1047
48
(2001) 6 SCC 205
Page | 22
[2.2.2] That the suicide note which was recovered is completely inconclusive.
Upon embarking on the facts of the present case, it is stated clearly that A2 gave the alleged
suicide note to the father of the deceased, Sartaj. 49 This suicide note was never utilized properly
by the police during the investigation.
Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that
When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science
or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon
that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in
questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts.
Such persons are called experts.
In order for the court to be able to form a firm opinion as to the admissibility of the suicide note,
Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act has to be duly complied with. It is necessary for the
admission of the evidence of a handwriting expert, that the writing has to be admitted and proved
50
beyond any reasonable doubt.
Further, the suicide note which was recovered was first discovered by the A3, then handed over
to police. Meaning, there is a chance that the evidence might have been tampered with.
Therefore, in the absence of any scientific examination or expert opinion of the suicide note, the
suicide note should be ruled as inadmissible.
[2.2.3] That the suicide note cannot be termed as Dying Declaration.
According to Black‟s Law Dictionary, statements made by a person who is lying at the point of
death, and is conscious of his approaching dissolution, in reference to the manner in which he
received the injuries of which he is dying, or other immediate cause of his death are dying
declaration. 51
The suicide note‟s admissibility itself has been brought in the question, because its genuineness
cannot be verified because of incompetent behaviour of the police. Even after keeping that aside,
there can be no dispute that dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction, however, such
49
Proposition, Paragraph 2
50
Suresh Chandra Sanyal v. Emperor, (1912) 39 Cal 606.
51
Page | 23
a dying declaration has to be proved to be wholly reliable, voluntary, and truthful and further that
the maker thereof must be in a fit medical condition to make it. 52
Dying Declaration should be such, which should immensely strike to be genuine and stating true
story of its maker. It should be free from all doubts and on going through it, an impression has to
be registered immediately in mind that is genuine, true and not tended with doubts. Further it
53
should not be result of tutoring.
In the present case, the suicide note is far from reliable, let alone be voluntary and truthful.
Therefore, in light of the present circumstances, the suicide note cannot be termed as dying
declaration.
ISSUE 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE DECEASED?
In the end it all comes down to one thing that is that a crime of murder was committed by the
Accused. It is most humbly contended that the accused is guilty for committing the offense of
murder under Section 302 54 of IPC. Murder as defined in the Black‟s Law Dictionary is the
killing of a human being with malice aforethought 55. Section 302, IPC prescribes the punishment
for committing Murder. In order to convict the accused under Section 302, it is pertinent to
understand the essentials of murder.
[3.1] Whether the accused an intention to commit the murder.
Black‟s Law Dictionary56 defines Intention as the “Determination to act in a certain way or to do
a certain thing”. Intention means the expectation of the consequences in question. When a man is
charged with doing an act, of which the probable cause consequences may be highly injurious,
the intention is an inference of law resulting from the doing of the act 57 . An Intention also
52
Waikhom Yaima Singh v. State of Manipal, 2011 Cr LJ 2673
53
Nanhar v. State of Haryana, 2010 Cr LJ 2450
54
Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860: Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment
for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
55
Bryan A. Garner, Black‟s Law Dictionary, p. 1038, 7th Edition, 1999, West Publication Co.
56
57
Per Lord Ellenborough, C.J. in Dixon (1814) 3 M. & S. 11, 15
Page | 24
includes foresight of certainty. It is accepted that intention means either acting to bring about a
particular result (direct intention) or acting in the face of the acknowledged virtual certainity that
a particular result will come about.58 The word “intention” in itself is capable of different shades
of meaning59. Under Section 300, IPC the word intention plays a crucial role. If the act is done
with the intention of causing bodily injury and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is
sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death that also would come within the
meaning of Murder 60.
In the present case in hand, the Accused had the required intention behind causing the death of
the deceased. The Cruelty and harassment meted out to Kukko, in the name of dowry attracts the
required intention of causing her death. Intention is the decision to bring about a prohibited
consequence61.
[3.2] Whether the accused did a criminal conspiracy with common intention to execute the
offence?
The accused, A1, A2, and A3 with a common intention meticulously planned out her murder and
exhibited it as a case of mere suicide. With a Suicide Note that did not at all indicated any malice
on their part. Common Intention is a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuant to the plan.
In order to bring a case under section 34 of IPC, it is not necessary that there must be a prior
conspiracy or pre-meditation, the common intention can be formed in the course of occurrence 62.
Since, the burden lies on the counsel for Prosecution to prove that actual participation of more
than one person for commission of criminal act was done in furtherance of common intention at
a prior concert63.
58
Findlay Stark, It’s only words: On Meaning and Mens Rea, [2013] C.L.J. 156
59
Sanku Sreedharan Kottukallil v. State Of Kerala, AIR 1970 Ker 98
60
Annamalai v. Inspector Of Police, Madras High Court, 2017 SCC OnLine Mad 12576
61
R. v. Mohan, [1994] 2 SCR 9
62
Hari Om v. State Of Uttar Pradesh, (1993) 1 Crimes 294 (SC)
63
State of Orissa v. Ajun Das, AIR 1999 SC 3229
Page | 25
The Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in Kehar Singh & Ors. v. The State (Delhi Admn.)64 has
held:
"Section 120A provides for the definition of criminal conspiracy and it speaks of that when two
or more persons agree to do or cause to be done an act which is an illegal act and S.120-B
provides for the punishment for a criminal conspiracy and it is interesting to note that in order to
prove a conspiracy it has always been felt that it was not easy to get direct evidence. It appears
that considering this experience about the proof of conspiracy that S.10 of the Indian Evidence
Act was enacted. The counsel for Prosecution would like establish the fact that the Investigating
Officer has very clearly after the fact finding has mentioned in the charge sheet, Exhibit-6, point
14 that the deceased was tortured on a daily basis by her in-laws and husband. It is also
mentioned in the charge sheet that her friends claimed that the environment created by the family
members was equal to mental torment. Therefore, since the Accused is guilty under section
120A, IPC the counsel for prosecution most humbly pleads this hon‟ble court to charge the
Accused under Section 120B, IPC.
The deceased was also forced to work all day long, without a moment of relief. Conspiracy 65 is a
continuing offense which continues subsist till it is executed or rescinded or frustrated by choice
of necessity66The deceased, kukko‟s father had already filed an FIR concerning the domestic
violence meted out to her. The deceased‟s mother has time and again in the Police Report
claimed that she found burnt marks on her neck and body.
The Police Report describes the height of her agony and crops out the fact that A1 used to check
her mobile phone and question on everything. It was found that A1 did not allow her to keep any
privacy of her own. Not to forget the fact that Privacy has always been a Natural Right. In the
64
AIR 1988 SC 1883
65
A combination or confederacy between two or more persons formed for the purpose of committing, by their joint
efforts, some unlawful or criminal act, or some act which is lawful in itself, but becomes unlawful when done by the
concerted action of the conspirators, or for the purpose of using criminal or unlawful means to the commission of an
act not in itself unlawful. Henry Campbell Black, Black‟s Law Dictionary, p. 309, 6 th Edition, 1990, West
Publication Co.
66
Ram Narain Popli v. Central Bureau Of Investigation, (2003) 3 SCC 641
Page | 26
leading case of Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union Of India67, Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud,

J. said that the Natural Rights are not bestowed by the state. They inhere in human beings
because they are human. They exist equally in the individual irrespective of class or strata,
gender or orientation. As per the facts of the case, the deceased was watched and guarded all the
time, and was provided with no sense of privacy of her own. This makes the portrayal of suicide
rather more suspicious as the accused A1 was totally unaware of her absence until Vtapi
screamed out.
Therefore, the Mens Rea and the Actus Reus 68 on the part of the Accused has been clearly
established by the counsel for prosecution. Hence, the accused are guilty of murder.
[3.3] Whether the acts and offences of the accused may also be charged as Dowry Death.
As stated earlier in arguments [1.2.1], the accused necessarily fulfill the ingredients which need
to be charged for Dowry Death u/s 304-B IPC. When Dowry Death takes place in the house of
the in-laws, the onus is upon them to explain the circumstances leading to the victim‟s death. 69 It
is also stated that the offence of dowry death may be explained by circumstantial evidence. 70
In the present case, the accused fall in all the circumstances clearly given under the provisions of
dowry death. The accused also have no alibi to prove otherwise and their crimes have been
proved beyond any reasonable doubt. Hence, Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act, 187271
shall come into play and the Court may presume that the accused have caused the dowry death.
It is therefore humbly prayed before this Court to convict the accused under section 304-B of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well.
67
(2018) 1 SCC 809
68
Any wrongful act. Aiyar, P Ramanatha, The Law Lexicon, p. 49, 2nd Edition, 2006
69
Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam v. State of A.P., (1993) Cr LJ 1635; Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.; See
also: Halsbury Laws of India, Vol. 5(1) & 5(2)
70
Gurpreet Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 2002 SC 3217
71
When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon
before her death such woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with,
any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
Page | 27
PRAYER
Wherefore, in the light of facts stated, issues raised, arguments advanced, and authorities cited,
the Prosecution humbly prays before this Hon‟ble Court that this Court may be pleased to:-
a) Convict Atapi under sections 498-A, 304-B, 120-B, 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
b) Convict Sartaj under sections 498-A, 304-B, 120-B, 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
c) Convict Vatapi under sections 498-A, 304-B, 120-B, 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860.
AND/OR
Pass any other such order which the court may deem fit in the light of Justice, Equity, and Good
Conscience, to which the Counsel shall ever be duty bound to.
All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.
Sd/-
Public Prosecutor
Page | 28

Prosecution

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prosecution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Team Code: TC – 27P

THE ICFAI LAW SCHOOL, DEHRADUN INTRA – TRIAL ADVOCACY

The Hon’ble Sessions Court of Wasseypur, Pachim Pradesh

(Filed under Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)

State of Pachim Pradesh …Prosecution

Atapi, Sartaj, & Vatapi …Defence

Humbly submitted by the counsels

Issue 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY

AGAINST THE DECEASED?......................................................................................................13

[1.1] That the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused………….……………………..14

Issue 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS

SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT THE DECEASED COMMITTED SUICIDE ……………...18

[2.2.3] That the suicide note cannot be termed as Dying Declaration............................................23

Issue 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE

[3.1] Whether the accused an intention to commit the murder.......................................................24

A.C. Appeal cases

Name Citation Page

Ram Narain Popli v. Central Bureau Of Investigation (2003) 3 SCC 641 24

1. B.B. MITRA, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, 20th Ed., 2006

1. Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 72. ISSN: 0008-1973

1. Indian Penal Code, 1860

ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY

ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS

ISSUE 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE DECEASED?

ISSUE 1: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF COMMITTING CRUELTY

1. The woman must be married.

2. She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and

[1.1] That the deceased was subjected to cruelty by the accused.

"Cruelty" as the intentional and malicious infliction of physical suffering upon

 The accused did commit cruelty against the deceased. [1.1]

ISSUE 2: WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COURT IS

In Mandhari v. State of Chattisgarh 41 – the appellant himself reported the commission of

Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that

[2.2.3] That the suicide note cannot be termed as Dying Declaration.

ISSUE 3: WHETHER THE ACCUSED ARE GUILTY OF MURDERING THE DECEASED?

[3.1] Whether the accused an intention to commit the murder.

leading case of Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union Of India67, Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud,

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

You might also like