DR. D Y. PATIL COLLEGE OF LAW =<: Y. PATIL COLLEGE OF LAW AFFILIATED TO MUMBAI UNIVERSITY AND APPROVED BY BCI) LLB SEM V PRACTICAL TRAINING III “SB SEM V PRACTICAL TRAINING III MOOT PROPOSITIONS MOOT PROPOSITION - 1 te Tiffany International School organized a student trip to Marsil for 10 days. The trip included visiting places like Space Centre, Art Museums etc. Miss Naina Patwa, 8th grade Student of Tiffany International School, was excited to attend this trip. She is a smart, independent, and happy-go-lucky student. Her parents were reluctant to let her go, as they were worried about her safety and the availability of acceptable food. Miss Naina and her family practiced Deeinism as their religion and had vegetarian dietary habits. She had never consumed a vegetable which was grown below the ground. She was also Severely lactose intolerant and was very aware of the fact, Mr- and Mrs, Patwa decided to discuss their concerns with the teacher who was goingto accompany the students on the trip. The teacher told them that she didn’t expect Miss Naina's dietary restrictions would be a problem, but that she would endeavour to provide her with acceptable food. After this assurance from the teacher, the parents agreed to allow Miss Naina to attend the trip. They signed a consent form, explicitly giving their Permission for Miss Naina to attend, and filled a form provided by the teacher listingthe food that she is allergic to. When it was time for Miss Naina to leave for the trip , they Packed certain food items for her so that she could eat in an emergency in which acceptable food was not available, On the 9th day of the trip, the class was at a site where only a few food choices were available. The only vegetarian restaurant there, “VegBeCan’, used genetically modified ingredients. For example, they used carrots and potatoes that had been genetig 1Modified to grow above the ground rather than below. The teacher along with the students decided to go to the same restaurant. The teacher decided to play safe and ordered a mashed potatoes and stir-fried vegetables dish for all the students. The Students were excited as they never had such a meal in their home country. Miss Naina and the other students consumed the meal. The next day she fell sick and Could not travel. The other students showed no symptoms of illness. Her illness seemed to be directly related to the food consumed. However, there was no surety whether it “2s due to the vegetables or the dairy product used in the food. As a result of her illness, Miss Naina had to stay three More days at a hospital in Marsil. She was depressed about being ill and staying in an unfamiliar place without her parents. Tiffany International School arranged @ new guardian for that duration since the teacher had to accompany the other kids back to Bharists on the trip back. Mr. and Mrs. Patwa were Panicked about their daughter. After recovering, Miss Naina travelled back to Bharists alone, Upon the arrival of Miss Naina back home, she was weak and greatly distressed. She barely spoke to her parents or her friends for a month. She "2S not willing to go out or go to school either, As a result, she missed her Science Olympiad exam. Her parents took Miss Naina to a Psychologist. The doctor highligh ted the fact that she had suffered severe anxiety and feelings of abandonment and paranoia while on the trip, and that as a result she continued to experience extreme anxiety and PTSD. Mr. and Mrs. Patwa decided to file a complaint against Tiffany International School and the teacher for the suffering caused to their child, The court has decided to hear the matter on 23rd December 2020. THE ISSUES IN SE ARE: 1, Whether the Teacher should be responsible for Miss Naina’s current state? 2. If the Teacher is liable, whether Tiffany International School should be held accountable for the same? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed.Shivrashtra is a state in the Union of Indiva, The population of the state on the basis of religious faith comprises 40% Hindus, 25% Muslims, 15% Christians and the remaining 20% belong to various smaller groups like Parsis, Tribal and Non-tribals and Non- believers. The state is predominately a hilly area with four holy rivers flowing through it and the people are very religious by nature. A large number of population being literate, carries out primitive occupations, Religious practices, superstitions and rituals, take much of their time and money which has greatly affected the development of the State. The state is known all over the world for its religious centers, The various religious Institutions in the state are imparting only religious education putting the secular Education into oblivion which has reduced drastically the people’s employment avenues. As the state is a pilgrimage center, the religious leaders, Gurus and Prophets of various religions in the state are vying with one another because of huge donations offered by the pilgrims. Accordingly, mass prayers, retreats, yagnas, penance services etc. are conducted very frequently. The religious leaders, so called God men in order to continue ‘heir hold, have created a kind of fear in the mind of their followers by way of fundamentalist practices and attitudes, which further created divisions in the society and often within the families too, The youths of the State, who were boiling with anger and frustration looking at the Economic progress of other states, often revolted against those oppressive and Suppressive religious practices that prevailed in their states. There were many protests by many groups headed by moderates, intellectuals and nonbelievers on various occasions in different parts of the State. Dr. Virendra Panhalkar, the 70 years old social activist, who was shot dead on 20th August, 2013 in one city of the State of Shivrashtra, had waged a long and lonely battle for an Anti-Superstition Law. Within a week after the vicious assassination of Dr. Panhalkar, the Governor of Shivrashtra signed the ‘Black Magic Prohibition’ Ordinance. 3"*came in to force from 26th August, 2013 all over the State of Shivrashtra. The ordinance is aimed at banning superstitious practices, inhuman rituals and black Magic that have been the used to exploit People in the name of religious beliefs. This 'aw is against fraudulent and exploitative practices, such practices have no place in an enlightened society. In the entire text there is not a single word about God or Religion. The essential purpose of this law is to bring social awakening and awareness in the Society and to create a healthy and safe social environment with a view to protect the common people in the society against the evil and sinister practices thriving on ‘gnorance, The draft Bill clearly specifies 12 such practices . These includes, claiming to Perform surgery with just fingers or to change the sex of the fetus in the womb, sexual ®xPloitation under the guise of claims of supernatural Powers, branding women as witches and causing them physical harm, human sacrifices and other Aghori practices. Inspite of coming into force of the above legislation the superstitious activities are no Tse. The people of State of Shivrashtra are being exploited by the self-declared God "ike Babaram Maharaj, who has amassed huge wealth by exploiting the religious Sentiments of the people. Under the garb of religious practices he started to exploit iterate and poor women & children and employed youths. He uses their energies by Providing them training to play with rifles and arms for his own protection and to prevent Govt, authorities to take any action against him. He poses himself ag god or Supernatural power to attract women and he sexually abused many women’s too. To ban his activities the govt. of Shivrashtra tried to enter in to his Ashram but could not succeed, In the backdrop of above facts and circumstances, Drishti Foundation which is NGO working against the exploitation of the religious feelings of the people by such so called Godman Babaram, has filed a PIL before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of Constitution of Indiva challenging the activities of exploitation being carried out by the 50 called Baba’s in their Maths and Ashrams and has prayed therein that all these Maths and Ashrams which are carrying out the activities of exploiting the religious feeling of the people should be closed and all the assets acquired by these Baba’s be confiscated and added to the national wealth of Indiva,ooking in to the facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Supreme court of Indiva, has Placed the present PIL for final disposal at the stage of admission and has framed following issues:- ‘THE ISSUES IN THE CASE ARE; admission? 2) Whether the activities exploiting the religious sentiments of the people amount to infringement of Fundamental Rights of the people of Indiva? 3) Whether the alleged activities are contrary to the secular structure of Union of Indiva 2s enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of Indiva? 4) Whether the ban on such Maths / Ashrams would violate the fundamental rights of the people to follow the religious faith of their choice? 5) Whether instead of closing down such Math’s / Ashrams, keeping these Math’s / Ashrams under the Government supervision would be available alternative? 6) Whether amendment in the present laws is necessary to deal sternly with such Baba’s? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues Pertaining to the above problem can be framed. Note: - The laws and Constitution of Indiva is the same as to the laws and Constitution of IndiaMOOT PROPOSITION - II Arundhati Kumar was a 22-year-old girl who was pursuing her degree from Geeta College of engineering, Naultha. A bright career awaited her as not only was she the topper of her class, but also had interned with some acclaimed MNC’s of the country. In her fourth year at college, she came close with a friend and batchmate, Shikhar Singh, who also was a brilliant student, Shikhar was into a luxurious lifestyle, while Arundhati was a somber girl from a middle-class background. In 2009, their families were introduced to each other, and on 9" of November 2010, they got married according to Hindu rites. Arundhati moved into her matrimonial home with Shikhar’s parents, sister and grandmother, and started a life as well as her career along with Shikhar in Panipat ity. She had some differences with her in laws on many occasions, but the matter Was mostly settled amicably. With the passage of time their practice was not going as expected, Shikhar wanted to maintain his high life style, which saw the family in a near financial crisis. Arundhati gave birth to a baby girl on 11" December 2012. Shikhar then took a loan from Arundhati’s parents of Rs. 5,00,000 which he later refused to return. Due to which Arundhati’s relation with him deteriorates and on many occasions, fights turned Physical also. When in drunken state, Shikhar used to blame Arundhati for being from 2 family of beggars. This remark hurt her a lot and once she even tried to slit her wrists and end her life but was saved by her sister in law. After the incident, the physician did prescribe some medicines for Arundhati and also advised her to consult a Psychiatrist .She went to her parent’s home and told Shikhar that she would never return. But her parents convinced her to return to her in laws. On 10" April 2014 Arundhati gave birth to a baby boy which lead the family to a financial mess. Shikhar was very disturbed because of these financial complications, and in turn he used to vent his frustration on Arundhati. She in turn became more agitated and started suffering from depression as well as mood swings. On 4" January 2015, neighbors saw Arundhati running out of the house with her sari on fire. Her mother in law was running after her shouting that Arundhati was out of her mind to do something like this. She collapsed on the road, from where she was taken thospital and statement i i's mother in law and husband were arrested from the house and were sent to judicial custody. THE MAIN ISSUES BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, PANIPAT ARE : 1, Whether the accused Shikhar and Sarda are liable for dowry death under Section 304-B and for cruelty under Section 498A of IPC? 2. Whether the accused Shikhar and Sarda are liable for murder under section 302 of IPC? 3: Whether the accused Shikhar and Sarda are lable for abetment of suicide under | Section 306 of IPC? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to th above problem can be framed.MOOT PROPOSITION IV State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Rahul The “Ghaziabad College of Education" is an Educational Institution in Uttar Pradesh. This 'S @ multi-faculty institution with strength of 3000 students at its campus. There was great enthusiasm in the Students’ Organizations to contest elections in the College General Body Elections. The main contest was between Indian Communist Party (ICP) and Indian Socialist Party (ISP). Both the groups worked hard to secure students! Support and their votes. Mukesh Singh was the candidate for the President ship from the ICP, He was also having the support of a National Political Party. Therefore, that Party's prestige was also involved in the success of this candidate, Mukesh Singh spent @ lot on throwing parties and also adopted other means and methods to garnish the Support of the students. The candidate from ISP, Rahul was quite popular amongst the students for his honesty, integrity and always been working for students’ welfare. After 3 month long campaign, the elections were held on 15th September 2016. Casting of vote went on peacefully. The result was declared on 17th September 2016 and Mukesh Singh won the elections by a margin of just two votes. Wave of joy went around in the Indian Communist Party. Indian Socialist Party was disappointed and was sensing that victory of Mukesh was only due to money flow and unfair practices adopted by Mukesh. On 19th September 2016, at about 7:00 PM at the College cafeteria Mukesh invited Rahul to his dinner party. Rahul flatly refused the invitation by saying that he will never attend @ party hosted by a forged person. Mukesh insisted by explaining to him, “Let us forget our past animosities and work for the welfare of the students together” but Rahul again said “No! I do not wish to join your dinner party as I know how you have won the elections by fraudulent means, I will not go to the party of a scoundrel.” At this Mukesh got annoyed and felt insulted in the public. He told Rahul “You know that I can adopt any means for what I want”, Rahul left the cafeteria by saying, “Hell with you!” Rahul left the cafeteria and went away with his friend Sanjay. At about 8.30 PM Sanjay drove out in his Jeep from the parking area with Rahul seated in the jeep beside him. When their jeep was passing through the main gate of the college, Mukesh andfriend Sameer were standing in wait for them. Now Mukesh was having a p istol in his hand. Mukesh signaled Sanjay to stop the vehicle but Rahul told him not to stop there. Then, Mukesh fired in the air, Rahul asked Sanjay to drive fast. Mukesh and Sameer chased the Jeep on their bike with Sameer driving and Mukesh riding the pillion. Mukesh fired indiscriminately while chasing the jeep. One bullet hit Sanjay in his right upper arm. Rahul asked Sanjay to stop the vehicle and got down from the jeep. Sameer stopped the bike where Rahul was standing. Mukesh got off the bike tried to shoot at Rahul. But he could not as there was no cartridge in the pistol. Then Rahul took out an Tron rod out of the jeep and aimed a hit at Mukesh. But Mukesh ducked and the rod fell on the head of Sameer who was sitting on his bike just next to Mukesh. Sameer started bleeding profusely and fell unconscious. Both Rahul and Sanjay left the scene immediately. Mukesh took Sameer to hospital. Sameer died after 12 hours in the hospital. A case was registered against Rahul under section 302 read with Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Post mortem report disclosed the cause of death was head Injury which was ante mortem in nature. Investigating officer recovered the iron rod used by Rahul from a pond near where crime took place, upon information given by Rahul, while in police custody. Rahul pleaded right to private defense, grave and sudden Provocation and accident. Argue the Case on behalf of “Prosecution” and “Defense” before the Trial Court THE ISSUES IN THE CASE ARE: 1. Whether the case under Section 302 r/w section 301 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 is maintainable? 2. Whether Rahul the accused can plead right to private defense, grave and sudden provocation and accident? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed. |MOOT PROPOSITION V Karim worked as a system operator at a computer Centre in Jajhhar Dist., Haryana and lived in the town. His village was at a distance of 12 kms from his workplace which he ordinarily visited on Saturdays and Sundays. Sher Shah was a farmer who lived with his family consisting of his wife, Sobti, son Gajendar Shah and a daughter Naina. Sher Shah’s brother, Suri Shah, also lived in the same household. He was used to drinking and gambling and owed a debt of Rs. 20,000 to Karim. Whenever Karim demanded his money, Suri Shah showed his helplessness but never denied to pay off his debt. Karim was in love with Naina and used to meet Naina on the weekends when her father was not at home on the pretext that he had come to collect the money. Sher Shah did not like it and told Karim many a times not to visit his home in his absence. He also scolded his deughter for meeting Karim but Karim did not stop visiting Naina. During the day on Monday, 8th August 2010, Karim received a phone call from Suri Shah inviting him to come that evening to collect his debt, Karim went to their house around 8.30 P.M. The members of Naina’s family had finished their dinner and were preparing to go to sleep. On hearing some whispering voices coming from the backyard of their house, Sher Shah with his brother Suri Shah and son Gajendar Shah went there to investigate. They saw Karim talking with Naina. Sher Shah lost his temper and started abusing Karim. Gajendar Shah brought a lathi from inside and gave a blow to Karim on the leg. Then Suri Shah grabbed the lathi from Gajendar Shah and started beating Karim mercilessly giving blows on his head and chest. On hearing the hue and cry, other villagers came to the scene. They found Suri Shah giving blows to Karim while the other two were shouting abus es on Karim. Karim was bleeding from the head and became unconscious. He was taken to | the hospital by the villagers where he died three days later without regaining consciousness. The post-mortem report confirmed that Karim suffered injuries on the head and fractures of three ribs. There were many concussions on different parts of his body. There was much loss of blood. While none of the injuries independently was sufficient to cause death, the cumulative result was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, FIR was registered against Suri Shah, Gajendar Shah and Sher Shah under Section 307 read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Three days later when Karim died, it was changed to Section 302 r/w 34 IPC, The session court charged and 10Convicted all the three accused persons under Section 302 r/w 34 of the IPC and Sentenced them to life imprisonment for the murder of Karim. The accused persons leaded grave and sudden provocation in their defense, They also pleaded that the Prosecution had failed to prove existence of common intention of all the three accused to kill Karim. In the absence of proof of common intention, they cannot be convicted under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC, The three accused have filed an appeal to the High Court against the order of conviction and sentence, ISSUES: 1, Whether the order of conviction and sentence of the sessions court under Section 302 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 should be set aside? 2. The three accused are not guilty of murder under Section 302 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860. 3. The prosecution had failed to prove existence of common intention of all the three accused to kill Karim under Section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860. 4, The accused acted as a result of grave and sudden provocation Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed. 11 weyMOOT PROPOSITION VI The Cockroch (P) Ltd., a pharmaceutical Delhi based company, made a multivitamin Capsule called the "Maggots-M". The company claimed that the production of such Capsules is purely for the overall health, wellbeing and vitality of men, and therefore, these capsules are one of the best diet health Supplements as these capsules are very effective and a unique blend of ginseng, vitamins and minerals. The company announced 'n public that by taking one capsule a day, it provides great energy as well as helps to fight against tiredness. It enhances the stress handling ability. The company aggressively fixed the price of each capsule at Rs.50/-. The company declared in public interest that these capsules are prepared to boost immunity as well as help to enhance the quality of life. It improves the physical and mental health as well as helps to rejuvenate and strengthen the body organs. To stay fit and active during the day, bring home the "Maggots-M" capsules. ‘The Cockroch (P) Ltd. published advertisements in the reputed newspapers and other media channels on December 01, 2013, claiming the number of benefits for the consumption of "Maggots-M" capsules such as a diet health supplement for men; a unique combination of minerals, vitamins and ginseng; Provides energy and fights against tiredness; Perfect for overall health and vitality; Enhances quality of life; Helps to boost immunity; Strengthens and rejuvenates body organs; Enhances mental and physical health; Helps to stay fit and active throughout the day. The company mentioned in the advertisement that these capsules have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration or the FSSAI (i.e., Food Safety and Standard Authority of India). The Company declared in its advertisement that this product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. The company also mentioned that all disputes regarding the consumption of these capsules must be subject to the jurisdiction Courts in Dwarka, Delhi only. The Cockroch (P) Ltd. further published advertisements in the same reputed newspapers and other media channels on June 15, 2014, claiming that it would pay Rs. Sopwith it Le., one : iti.e., one capsule a day and this offer is Not retrospectively applicable. h ent gener , The statement generated by the Cockroch (P) Ltd. is as under:- "Rs.50,000/- reward will be paid by the Cockroch (P) Ltd, to any per weakness or Son who contracts with the increasing fatigue, any disease caused by taking multi-vitamin “Maggots-M” capsules, after having used one capsule a day, according to the printed directions Supplied with the pack of 10, 30 and 60 capsules whose expiry period will be of 5 years from the date of Manufacturing. The statement regarding award of Rs.50,000/- was printed on each pack Of 10, 30 and 60 capsules.” During the period of 2014-15, People consumed thousands of "MaggotsM" multi-vitamin Capsules as preventive against body weakness; fatigue or any other disease due to deficiency of any vitamin in the body and in no ascertained case any adverse effect was found by those using these capsules. Mr. Kharak Singh, aged 15 years, suffered from malnutrition; chronic fatigue syndrome and vitamin deficiency that led to muscle weakness in the entire body system. The doctor recommended him daily intakes of selected vitamins. He saw the advertisement of the Cockroch (P) Ltd., on July 15, 2014 regarding "Maggots- " multi-vitamin capsules. He bought 5 packs of capsules bearing the manufacturing and packing date of January 15, 2014, Each pack contained the dose of 60 capsules. He started consuming one capsule a day as per the instructions mentioned in each pack. He consumed the entire capsules as per the instructions mentioned by the company for nearly 10 months but after a week he found that his body 's heavily relying on these capsules. He felt lot of bodily changes due to stop consuming Capsules such as frequent stomach upset; severe allergic reactions; difficulty in breathing; tightness in the chest; swelling of the mouth, face, lips or tongue; feeling of fatigue and weakness of the entire body. Mr. Kharak Singh discovered that on resuming the consumption of these "Maggots-M" multi-vitamin capsules as per the usage prescription of the Cockroch (P) Ltd. Company, he got relief from all types of bodily changes. In the meantime, during January - 2016, the company again aggressively raised price of each capsule by 50% to Rs.75/- as it found the enormous success and rise in demand for the product. Mr. Kharak Singh after having been firmly believed that his body cannot smoothly work without consuming these capsules and his body developed an addiction for such capsules, he felt himself cheated 13by the company as he ai cha mi ‘amin capsules. He, Vy “Ompany as he again cannot afford such a high price multi-vitamin capsules. He, therefore ned Rs.5 ol m ages from the Cockroch (P) Ltd. Tefore, claimed Rs.50,000/- and other for of damages from the Cockroch (P) Ltd. The company bluntly ignored the claim of Mr. Kharak Singh. After few days, Mr. Kharak Singh's advocate sent notice to the Cockroch (P) Ltd. Fegarding his claim of Rs.50,000/- and other damages, On this notice, the company's Officers replied with an anonymous letter that if it is used Properly, the company had complete confidence in the capsule's efficacy, but "to protect the company against all fraudulent claims" they would need him to come to the company’s office to use the capsule each day and be checked by the secretary. Mr. Karak Singh now brought a claim to the court of law for seeking justice. The advocate representing him argued that the advertisement and his reliance on it was a contract between him and the company, and So the company ought to pay. The company denied such type of contract, THE ISSUES IN THE CASE ARE: 1, Whether there was any binding effect of the contract between the parties? 2, Whether the contract in question required a formal notification of acceptance? 3. Whether Mr. Kharak Singh was required to communicate his acceptance of the offer to Cockroch (P) Ltd.Company? 4. Whether Mr. Kharak Singh provided any consideration in exchange for the reward of Rs.50,000/- offered by the company? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed. 14\ 100T PROPOSITION VII Lata Devi, a woman belonging from Bhuwaii village , De Rambostan started working under the velopment Project for Women run by the Government of Rambostan, in the year 1985. She was employed as a ‘Saki’ which means ‘friend’ in Hindi.In the year 1987, as a part of her job, Lata Devi took up an issue of attempted rape of a woman who hailed from a neighbouring village. For this act, she gained full support from the members of her village. In the year 1992, Lata Devi took up another issue based on the government’s campaign against child marriage, This campaign was Subjected to disap proval and ignorance by all the members of the village, even though they were aware of the fact that child marriage is illegal.in the meantime, the family of Mukesh Singh had made arrangements to perform Such a marriage, of his infant daughter, Lata Devi, abiding by the work assigned to her, tried to persuade the family to not Perform the marriage but all her attempts resulted in being futile, The family decided to go ahead with the Marriage.On 5th May 1992, the sub- divisional officer (SDO) along with the Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) went and stopped the Said marriage. However, the marriage was performed the next day and no Police action was taken against it. Later, it was established by the villagers that the police visits were a result of Lata Devi's actions. This led to boycotting Lata Deviand her family. Lata Devi also lost her Job amid this boycott.On 22nd September 1992, to seek vengeance, five men i.e, four from the above-mentioned Singh family- Ram Singh, Gopal Singh, Mukesh Singh , and Badal Singh along with one Santosh Sharma had attacked Lata Devi’s husband and later brutally gang-raped her. The police had tried all possible ways to avoic filing any complaint against the accused which resulted in a delayed investigation. Even after facing so much criticism, Lata Devi, withher | incessant determination to get justice, managed to lodge a complaint. The medical examination was delayed for fifty-two hours. However, the examiner did not mention any commission of rape in the report but rather mentioned the age of the victim.In the absence of sufficient evidence and with the help of the local MLA Sher Singh , all the accused manages to get an acquittal in the Trial Court. But this acquittal resulted in a huge backlash from many women activists and organizations which supported Lata Devi. These organizations came together and raised their voice to attain justice, which resulted in the filing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).The PIL was filed by a women’s rights group known 159s “Aastha. It laid its focus on the enforcement of the fundamental rights of women at the Workplace under the provisions of Article 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, it also raised the issue of the need for protection of women from sexual harassment at Workplace. THE ISSUES IN THE CASE Are: 1, Whether sexual harassment at the Workplace amounts to a violation of Rights of Gender Inequality and Right to Life and Liberty? Whether the court could apply international laws in the absence of applicable Measures under the existing? ; Whether the employer has any responsibility when sexual harassment is done to/by its employees? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed.MOOT PROPOSITION VOT Both Houses of the Parliament passed the Constitutional Amendment Bill to provide 10 % reservation in government jobs and educational institutions in favour of economically weaker sections on O9th January 2019 and enacted as Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019 to enable the State to make reservations based on the Economic criterion alone. The Act received the assent of the Hon‘ble President on 12th Jenuary 2019 and was published in the Gazette on the same day. Through this Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019; a new clause (6) was Inserted in Article 15 and 16 of the Constitution. Clause (6) as inserted in the Article 15 reads as follows: “(8) Nothing in this article or sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 or clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making, - (2) any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens, other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5); and (b) any special provision for the advancement of any economically weaker sections of citizens, other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5) in so far as such special Provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions, including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30, which in the case of reservation would be in addition to the existing reservations and subject to a maximum of ten per cent of the total seats in each category.” Explanation:-For the purpose of this Article and Article 16,"economically weaker sections” shall be such as may be notified by the State from time to time on the basis of family income and other indicators of economicdisadvantage.’ Similarly, Clause (6) was inserted into the Article 16 and it reads as follows "(6) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favor of any economically weaker sections of citizens other than the classes mentioned in clause (4), in addition to the existing reservation and subject to a maximum of ten per cent of the posts in each category.” Mr. Ravi challenged the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitutional (Amendment) Act, 2019 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution 7Claiming that, it violates the basic structure of the Constitution. ISSUES: 1 w Whether the issue raised by Mr, Ravi is maintainable. Whether 103rd Constitutional (Amendment) Act, 2013 violates any of the basic structures of the Constitution of India. Whether the additional 10% reservations for Economically Weaker Sections in ccucational institutions and public employment is unconstitutional, as it breaches and exceeds the 50% limit for reservations as laid down in Indra Sawhney vs Union of India (AIR 1993 SC 477) in 19937 18MOOT PROPOSITION IX Dr. Ridhi Sharma, a 35 years old Geneticist worked in New Life Hospital, one of the Prestigious hospitals in India, She Was very passionate about her patients and held an exceptionally progressive record, She worked around the clock at the hospital to make sure the well being of her patients and believed in making difference. One Mrs. Kalpna Pathak, 42 years old, resident of Amritsar was patient of New Life Hospital, Delhi, from Past 12 years as she was suffering from a rare, life-threatening syndrome called ROHHAD syndrome. Her family spent a lot of Money on her treatment but this disease was incurable and finally left her in Delhi for her further treatment. As travels were expensive, her family only visited her when they could, Though, they appointed Gayatri, a 18 years old caretaker for her. Living in hospital for 12 years almost broke Mrs. Pathak from inside. She used to be a warm and lively person who never compromised her freedom and liberty for anything. But, her time in hospital made her life monotonous and miserable. As a result, she started avoiding medications even after strict warnings by doctor and several times even overdosed tonics consisting of alcoholic contents. Dr. Ridhi came to know about this condition of Mrs. Pathak from Gayatri. She also agreed that Mrs, Pathak needed regular Medication. But Dr. Ridhi became quite sympathetic when she realized that Mrs. Pathak hadn't left the hospital once in 12 years. And became determined to discover any possible way to help her. Following through her research, she discovered that the precise cause of ROHHAD (Rhodes iliness) is reportedly unknown. Experts, however, suspect it could be a genetic disorder. She found out about a Project named "Discover Relief”, which aimed to discover readily accessible guidelines for patients with rare diseases and for the anesthesiologists caring for them. Dr. Ridhi, in the data presented under this project found out that Elixir Labs, the same company, which manufactured Mrs, Pathak’s medicines of ROHHAD disease, in a research have claimed that the drug they were marketing for Huntington's disease has also cured a considerable percentage of Rhodes disease patients as well. However, the chance of the treatment being fatal is expected to be 30 percent at her age. 19She decided to bring this ecided to bring this up to Mrs, Pathak as an option and tell her about the odds, to whicl eplied “T' hich Mrs. Pathak replied “I'm really thankful for the care and time my doctors have sven me, but it's just not enough just to be alive, 1 want to live” and consented to it. Dr. Ridhi wrote a detailed application Mentioning the medical history and current scenario of Mrs. Pathak’s health condition on 25 th March 2019 to Elixir Labs in order to ask for ation got rejected by the Managing Director of Elixir Labs, Mr. Naveen Mathur, stating that the drug h the drug but her applic fasn't been completely approved by Food and Drug Administration, it is yet being experimented, Dr. Ridhi and Mr. Mathur were never fond of each other due to their contrasting work hur was an established businessman who only bothered about ways to ™uttiply his profits. Dr. Ridhi decided to get to the bottom of the issue and found out that the Elixir labs actually never really wished to introduce the cure of Rhodes disease in Medical world as it would reduce their company's profits. This fumed Dr. Ridhi and she Gecided to get access to the drug either way and hence stole the sample drug sent by the lab to their hospital for the patients of Huntington's disease. ethics. Mr, Mat After getting the drug she asked Mrs, Pathak whether to give her the dose and she gave her verbal consent to Dr. Ridhi in front of Gayatri. Within a week Mrs. Pathak showed a miraculous recovery and on 1* may 2019 she was declared fully cured of the disease and Dr. Ridhi discharged her the next day without even keeping her under observation. Mrs, Pathak, after few days of discharge on 5'* May 2019 contacted Dr. Ridhi to thank her for giving her a new life where she was not just meaninglessly existing. But on 7 th May 2019 the news of Mrs. Pathak’s death came as a shock in the hospital which immediately raised alleging questions. The postmortem reports of Mrs. Pathak confirmed died of Cardiopulmonary arrest, it was registered as a case of “sudden unexplained death (SUD)". The husband of Mrs, Pathak sued the Hospital under Section 304A for causing death by medical negligence which led to an investigation within the hospital to find the cause of her death revealing the acts of Dr. Ridhi. The hospital held a meeting of Hospital Administration on 15 th May 2019 against the action of Dr. Ridhi consisting of 7 jury members which included 6 Senior Doctors and Mr. Mathur and asked her to explain her actions. Dr. Ridhi pleaded not guilty on the pretext of acting in good faith after receiving the consent of the patient which was corroborated 20by Gayatri. after the hearing, 5 members including Mr. Mathur voted against Dr. Ridhi overseeing the hospital's best interests, consequently she lost her reputed job at New Life Hospital, Delhi. Moreover, the license of Dr. Ridhi was suspended by the Medical Council of India for 7 years on 25t" May 2019 believing that she did commit medical negligence due to which a patient lost her life, Before the trial in court, this case gathered a lot of negative media attention which resulted in gross tarnishing of Dr. Ridhi’s reputation in society. The Trial Court on 26 th December 2019 convicted Dr. Ridhi under Section 304A IPC read with Section 90 and Section 337 of IPC and approved the Suspension of her licence. Now Dr. Ridhi Sharma has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court to seek justice against her conviction in Trial Court. The hearing of which is scheduled on 6" March 2021. ISSUES RAISED: 1, Whether or not the stance of the appeal is maintainable in court of law? 2.Whether or not the act of Dr. Ridhi Sharma amounts to negligence on her part? 3.Whether or not the Trial Court has erred in finding Dr. Ridhi Sharma guilty of Medic al Negligence under Section 304A of IPC? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed. aZAYER INDIA V. KIPLA AND ANR. The Lebola epidemic has claimed 12000 victims world over , since the outbreak in December 2013. Although there are bout 30,000 patients suffering from this viral hemorrhagic fever, victims of this deadly virus are largely in west Africa and the countries in the south - Asian peninsula. In India alone there are about 2500lebola patients. In March 2014, Zayer Inc., a multi-national company, patented its recently developed Grug formulation and the only known cure for the haemorthagic fever caused by the Lebola virus, in the United States of America. The drug, sold by the commercial name Lebin X, was classified as an Orphan Drug in the USA, owirg to which 50% of the R&D costs of Zayer were reimbursed by the Government. Zayer went on to obtain a patent on its drug in over 45 countries. In October 2014, Zayer was granted a patent in India too, pursuant to its application in April that year. This patent was worked by Zayer India Ltd., @ wholly owned subsidiary of Zayer Inc, and Lebin X was sold at Rs. 36,000 for 60 tablets per month. Kipla Pvt. Ltd, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in India, had also undertaken R&D to produce a drug molecule, after the Lebola outbreak in 2013. In November 2014, Kipla sought to enter into a license agreement with Zayer India to manufacture and sell its drug formulation, stating the growing public need and the unaffordability of Lebin X in India. It sought to sell the drug at a price of Rs. 600 per month, for the same dosage of 60 tablets. Negotiations however never took off, and ultimately, the license was refused by Zayer India. In February 2015, Kipla introduced Lebocin, its generic variant for treatment of Lebola, at a price of Rs. 600 per month, in the Indian market. It also sought to patent its formulation on the footing that it possessed therapeutic efficacy over existing drugs in the market. Zayer India however was swift to move the High Court of Delhi, in an original suit against Kipla, seeking protection against infringement of its patent in the drug formulation of LebinX, and an interim injunction against manufacture and sale of Lebocin by Kipla. Aggrieved by such action, Kipla moved the Competition Commission of India ("CCI"), arguing that Zayer India’s refusal to license the drug to it, and the subsequent effort to injunct Kipla from manufacturing and selling the drug, amounted to a gross abuse of its 22dominant position, especially in ight of the growing number of deaths caused by the Lebola virus. However, the CCI found that there was no prima facie case made out against Zayer India. In appeal proceedings before the Competition Appellate Tribunal CCOMPAT"), Kipla argued that the CCI ought to have, as a regulatory body, recognised the disparate public health impact caused to Indian patients, by Zayer India’s abuse of dominant position. The COMPAT set aside the order of the CCI, finding that there were heavy social costs to permitting Zayer India to violate Its obligations toward s public health, keeping in mind the fundamental right to health recognised under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It noted particularly that the public would be solely and absolutely dependent on Zayer India for access to life-saving drugs, should Kipla be injuncted, even as a willing licensee. Such conduct by Zayer India was found to squarely fall within the prohibition of Section 4 of the Competition Act. Mr. Thomas Ali, a member of the Board of Directors of Zayer India and shareholder, Moved the High Court of Delhi under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, againstthe order of the COMPAT, raising several grounds of challenge. Chief among them was that the order of the COMPAT was a nullity for lack of jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights. Other substantive grounds of challenge were also raised, including, inter alia, the violation of the fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g). The High Court however dismissed the petition, finding that the cost to public health was irreparable as aga inst the monetary losses incurred by Zayer. Zayer India then sought special leave to appeal against this judgment of the High Court, before the Supreme Court of India. When the SLP came up for admission, the Court issued notice to Kipla, and also directed that notice of the proceedings be given to the Attorney General for India, to represent the views of the Union Government. The special leave petition has been listed for final disposal on 4th October, 2015. ISSUES: 1. Whether the instant Special Leave Petition is maintainable for not? 2. Whether the decision of the Hon’ble High Court should be upheld or not ? Apart from the issues raised Additional issues pertaining to the above problem can be framed 23Moot Proposition -xI Facts - Dr Ram Swain V Union of Indica The Republic of Indica is an independent, ‘Union of States’, following the values of Human Dignity and Equality. It guarantees Fundamental Rights to its citizens and the Constitutional, legal and the policy framework of the Republic of Indica is in ‘parimateria’ to the Republic of India. The ideology of the Constitution is that of “equality among all”, and "equality among equals”. It exhibits to the world the principle of “Unity in Diversity”. Tels 2 multi-religious, multi-lingual, multi-cultural and secular country. The major religion of Indica is Religion 1 followed by Religion 2. The minorities belong to religion 3, religion 4 religion 5 and religion 6. Indica has been a male dominated society, with very meagre representation of women, the example of which can be seen in 2005, where in the Upper House the percentage of women was 11% and 11.8% in the Lower House. In this scenario 2 33% reservation for women in the Parliament was proposed. This was received with opposition more so because there was no single majority party in the Lower House from 1996 to 2005. Prior to 1996, Wrungrace Party, the majority party at that time had shown no interest for the same. In 1992 a Constitutional Amendment was introduced with the Provisions of 33% reservation of seats for women in Municipalities and Panchayats in all states of India. This too was faced with opposition from the minority community. However, it received support from the intellectual class .Mrs. Garima Dhall, Mrs Yamini Paul and Mrs. Mannat Raichandani being some of them. In 2005 the Rashtriya Party came to power with an absolute majority. In 2006 with a sudden move the 33% reservation was passed. This led to the increase of women representation in both houses to a situation in which no Bill could be passed without their support. A proviso to Art. 19(2) was inserted by a constitutional amendment to empower the women and give them the opportunity to express themselves freely. This move of RP was opposed by the majority as well as minority communities as it was empowering the elite class women exclusively. This law resulted in the tremendous increase of women representation in both Houses by 2015. This law became a tool of propagating the hidden agenda of delivering venomous and hate speech against the minority community. Along with this, the demand for appointment of women in all important constitutional and Public Offices. The increase in the population ofthe concept of equality under the Constitution. A PIL was field by Dr.R.MSawain in the High the Court of Dehri on the ground that the 33% reservation law was arbitrary. Mrs Fatima Ghansari, a member of the Lower House, brought a motion for the repealing of the 33% Feservation law, which was a tool in the hands of the ruling party to achieve their hidden religious agenda to make Indica, a religion 1 state under the guise of the amendment to Art, 19(2). MrsGhansari also brought to the notice of the House, the sting operation, “Zebra Post”, will reveals the collusion of the ruling party with large media houses, also running a religion 1 agenda. Her motion was repealed in the winter as well as the summer sessions. In consequence to her raising the motion, on Ist May MrsGhansari received a threatening cellon her landline with dire consequences if she insisted on keeping her stand on repealing the 2006 law. A FIR was lodged the same night by Mrs. Ghansari in the Police station of her locality regarding the same. This made MrsGhansari, file a petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court for declaring the reservation law as unconstitutional as it was being used ‘0 profess anti-secular agenda. In the same petition she prayed to the Supreme Court, to be provided with adequate security as she feared for her life. She contended that she Played the role of a ‘whistle blower’, by bringing out the hidden agenda of the ruling party. In an unprecedented event in February, 2018, the three ladies, the instrumental forces behind the passing of the law, were arrested by the Intelligence Agency of Indica, on the grounds of spying for and providing vital State Secrets to the enemy country of Indica with Such credible evidences. The members of the Wrongrace Party alleged that, Foreign Powers were behind the enactment of the 33% reservation law. A joint motion was introduced by them in the Lower House which was rejected by the Speaker. Not, having any other way, the party filed a PIL in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, alleging the role of enemy state, behind the passing of this law. They prayed before the Court to declare this 'aw as unconstitutional as it was serving the ends of the enemy state. The Supreme Court clubbed both the petitions filed before itself and the petition filed in the High Court of Dehri under Art. 139A of the Constitution. issues I ved 1. Whether the present case is maintainable before the HonourableCourt ? 2. Whether the law providing for 33 % reservation to women in the Parliament and the amendment of Art 19 (2) are arbitrary and violative of the concept of equality? 253. Whether the constitutional amendment to Art 19 (2) violates the basic structure of the constitution ? 4. Whether a law can be struck down on grounds that it serves the motive of any foreign power or has become a tool of communal politics ? 5. Whether legislating the law providing 33% reservation to women in parliament and the amendment to Art 19 (2) is of some ulterior religious motives ? 6 Whether the protection of the Whistle Blower Protection Act 2014 extends to Mrs Fatima Ghansari? 7. Whether the arrest of the three ladies is legally valid ? 26Moot Proposition XII Facts- Cheethah and Chetak Private limited V Income tax authority Zeon is a private IT & ITES company incorporated in the Cayman Islands, carrying on its software business primarily through Singapore. Zeon has been unable to obtain a Tax Residency Certificate from Singapore in order to claim Singapore Tax Residency for Indian tax purposes. They have a presence in India through a liaison office. Zeon are credited with designing a software called Neo, which was revolutionary in the human resource industry and could predict how well a new recruit would work in an organization that was going to hire him/her and adapt to the organization’s culture and values. Cheetah & Chetak Private Limited, an Indian manufacturing private limited company having its registered office in Mumbai, decided to buy this software. Consequently, an agreement was entered into between them and Zeon for the purchase of software for a price of INR 35,00,000 on @ year on year basis. No TDS was deducted by the manufacturing company at the time of making payments. The Agreement stated that the Licensee is granted a ‘non-exclusive, non-transferable license’, and that ‘all copies of the Software shall be the exclusive property of the of Zeon’, according to 2(a) and 2(d) of the Agreement. Further, 2(f)(i) and 2(f) Agreement stipulated that the software cannot be ‘loaned, rented, sold, sublicensed or transferred to any third party’, or ‘used by any parent, subsidiary or affiliated entity of Licensee’ without prior written consent of Zeon. Additionally, the Agreement placed restrictions on the Licensee to not ‘copy, decompile, disassemble or reverse-engineer the Software’ without Zeon's written consent, stipulated by 2(h). The manufacturing company filed income tax return without delays, and for AY 03-04 and 04-05, assessment order was passed under S. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 . For AY 2005-06, the assessment was completed under S, 143(1) and for AYs 2006-07, 07-08, 08-09, it was completed under S. 143(3) of the ITA. The assessing officer had accepted the returns and the transaction with Zeon in the above AYs. On July 4, 2014, the assessing officer sent a notice to Cheetah & Chetak Private Limited under S. 148 and disallowed the deduction claimed for payments made for these AYs and sort to recover INR 50 lacs from the assessee. The reason cited was that payments made by the manufacturer constituted ‘royalty’ under s, 9 of the Act, and tax should have been withheld at rate of 25% for all these years while ‘aking payment to Zeon for the software. Manufacturing company was charged under ITA as an ‘assesse-in-default’. Assessee decided to file a writ petition in the High Court of 27Bombay for all the AYs for which they had received a 148 notice, contending that the re- opening was bad in law. Issues involved: 1. Whether the writ filed by the petitioner is maintainable? 2. Whether the consideration paid under the license agreement amounts to royalty? 3. Whether the reopening and the reassessment are bad in law? 4. Whether the petitioner is an assessee in default? 28Moot Proposition - XIII Facts - Union of India V Women Freedom Union There is a moral notion in Indian society regarding ideal marriages. The past speaks that women were mistreated in various spheres of life across religions, regions and communities. Except for a few revolutionary activities, the situation hanged about more or less the same in the ancient, medieval, and early modern times. Crime against women like female foeticide, discrimination against women, rape, ete. is common. Regardless of existing stringent laws and safeguards to women, the Status of women has not elevated, The unfortunate part of gender inequality in our society is that the women too, through, continued socio-cultural conditioning, have accepted their Subordinate position to men and they are also part and parcel of same patriarchal system.Women Freedom Union (WFU), Non-Governmental Organization, raised its concern about discrimination against the women in so far as Sec. 497 of Indian Penal Code confers upon the husband only the right to prosecute the adultery and not women, filed the Writ Petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India challenging constitutional validity of Sec. 497 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being in violation of Article 14, 15 and 21 of Constitution of India.on 23.02.2018, Hon'ble Supreme Court passed its judgment dismissing the Writ Petition held that although right to be heard is a fundamental right but, law can't be held unconstitutional on such ground owing to express provision under law.Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court, WFU filed review Petition on the ground that said judgment experiences errors apparent on the face of the record as liberty envisaged under the Indian Constitution will be in peril.The said review petition was allowed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Court held that Sec, 497 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are unconstitutional. The Court further decriminalized the adultery observing that “Treating adultery an offence, we are disposed to think, would tantamount to the State entering into a real private realm, Under the existing provision, the husband is treated as an aggrieved person and the wife is ignored as a victim. Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a review petition, the Union of India has preferred Curative Petition The some of the grounds raised by the Union of India are as follows: 1. That Sec. 497 is valid on the ground of affirmative action. 292. All discriminations in favor of women are saved by Article 15 (3), and hence were exempted from punishment. That Sec. 497 does not account for instances where the husband has sexual relations outside his marriage would not render it unconstitutional. The sanctity of family life and the right to marriage are fundamental rights comprehended in the right to life under Article 21. An outsider who violates and injures these rights must be deterred and punished in accordance with criminal law. It was finally suggested that if this Court finds any part of this Sec. violative of the Constitutional provisions, the Court should read down that part, in so far as it is violative of the Constitution but retain the provision. The main Purpose of enacting Sec. 497, I.P.C. is to curb crime by way of deterrence, but declaring Sec. 497 as unconstitutional by Apex Court of the country, will not only Promote deceitful and immoral activity between man and woman but will also create chaos in society, Issues Involved 1. Whether the curative petition is maintainable ? 2. Whether sec 497 IPC protects the sanctity of marriage ? 3. Whether the exemption granted to married women under sec 497 IPC violates fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution? 4. Whether Sec 497 IPC read with sec 198(2) CrPC is unconstitutional ? 30Moot Proposition -XIV Facts = Democratic Reformer Association V Union of Indiva Union of Indiva is a Democratic Country. Democratic Reformers Association is a group Of certain Professional working in this country which has large network throughout the country. In this Association many Doctors, Lawyers, Artists, Engineers, writers are working together for social cause and social problems. They have formed different social media groups through which they share thoughts and different initiatives taken by their group. The Association always requests other members to add people in the group. Members meet with each other and post discussion on Social media group about the Gecisions taken by the government which includes giving reservation and curtailing the reservations for certain communities, and many members expressed their critical views about the government. Some people brought these arguments to the notice of Ruling Party members and thus it reached up to some of the ministers. An urgent cabinet meeting was called and a resolution was passed for banning these kinds of activities in the country, in exercise of the power conferred by the Information Technology Act, which talks about Monitoring and Decryption of Information, Some members of this group were arrested by the police stating that they are disseminating false information about the government and its policies with the aim of instigating people against the government. There were violent protest against the resolution passed by the Opposition party. Members found to have propagated such information under section 124A of Indiva Penal code and their Anticipatory Bail Application were rejected. The Government also authorized its securities and intelligence Agencies for the purpose of interception; monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resources. The Democratic Reformers Association argued that it is the ultimate assault on fundamental rights and the right to privacy. In this background, Democratic Reformers Association has filed a petition by challenging the validity of the order passed by the Home Ministry of Indiva, section 124-A of Indiva Penal code, and against the order of rejection of bail application before the before Hon'ble Supreme Court of Indiva. 31ISSUES 1. Whether the present writ is maintainable? 2, Whether the resolution passed by the cabinet banning online discussion about government policies is violative of Article 19 (1) (a)? 3. Whether the order passed by the home ministry for the purpose of the interception Monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resources is violative of the fundamental right to Privacy? 4. Whether section 124 A of Indiva Penal Code is ultra vires the Constitution? 5. Whether the High court erred in rejecting the anticipatory bail of the activist charged under $ 124 A of IPC? 32Moot Proposition - xv FACTS- High on life V State of Banisthrapur Banistan Jalsa Party has come to power in the Republic of Banistan with a promise to Promote reforms, development and progress in all aspects of life of its citizens. According to the Survey done by “We Care for you" the number of patients dying and suffering from mouth/lung cancer, liver cirrhosis owing to uncontrolled consumption of tobacco has increased. The Survey also states that Alcohol is the root of 40% hospital Admissions 80% of crimes, 60% of road accidents and 80% of divorce and domestic violence cases in the state. In pursuance of the Directive Principle of State Policy i.e. Article 47 of the Constitution, Government has introduced a prohibition on liquor sale. The Government simultaneously stipulated a total prohibition on all tobacco products. This was done with a view to remedy the fabric of the society that has been besmirched by the consumption of alcohol and tobacco.Mr. Akkal a follower of the Broom Party and the owner of a famous restaurant and bar'High on Life’ aggrieved by the actions of the Government, has approached the Hon‘ble High Court of Bigbay in Writ Jurisdiction challenging the Constitutional validity of the said notification and amendment. Issues involved 1. Whether the present petition is maintainable before the High Court of Big bay? 2. Whether the prohibition imposed by the state government is in accordance with constitutional provisions? 3. Whether right to trade in obnoxious commodities is a fundamental right under part III of the constitution? 33Facts = Tan organization V Union of Jinga Moot Proposition-XVI | The country of Jhinga is a Democratic Republic. It has a written Constitution that | guarantees its citizens inalienable fundamental rights. The Fundamental rights include the right to equality, right to freedom and so on, The country boasts of a very rich culture and heritage. People from various ethnicities, speaking various languages and following various cultural and religious practices cohabit in this country.. Many renowned historians and thinkers have recognized the territory in an around the nation of Jhinga as one that has @ = “imessed great civilizations since many centuries. The country has a huge population of 1.2 billion people; spread over 3.28 million square kilometers of land mass with every imaginable kind of weather pattern. 20 official languages with around 2000 dialects written | 'n 15 different scripts along with all major religions practiced liberally. Tanism is one of the religions in the country. The great teachers of Tanism have instilled great teachings and Practices which have been prevalent for many centuries. Among the various practices followed, some followers of Tanism take up ‘Chinthara’. It is a Practice of abstinence taken up by Tan individuals to end their lives through total abstinence of food and other material luxuries if one is satisfied that ‘one has done justice to one's worldly duties, It is thought that the outcome of this practice is certain attainment of “Nirvana”. A lady by the name of, aged 72, from the state of Rajasthan, took up this Practice in the year 2013. This instance | Created much furore and controversy. Much was written and spoken in support of and se against this practice. Later in the year 2015, an individual by the name Nikhil Soni filed a Public Interest Litigation in the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan challenging the Constitutional validity of the practice of “Chinthara”. The Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan | held the practice as un Constitutional and derogatory of Art. 21 with further directions to the State machinery to prosecute such practitioners under Sections 309 and 306 of the Jhingan Penal Code. One Tan religious organization approached the Hon'ble Apex Court of | Jhinga challenging the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan.Issues involved 1. Whether the petitioner has the Locus Standi to move 2. Does the practice of this Honorable Apex Court? “Chinthara” violate Right to Life and Personal Liberty and any other Fundamental Right enshrined in the Constitution of Jhinga? 3. Any other Issues can be raised pertaining to the current problem of Chinthara? eMoot Proposition ~ XVII Facts - Rakesh Singh and another V Gill Miss Seema was a promising law tennis player and won various competitions in the year 1990.Mr. Prakash Gill,President of the Haryana Lawn Tennis Associations [HLTAJand IGP of the Haryana Police visited her house on August 11,1990 to meether father Mr. Singh and told him that he should send her abroad for trainingas she was a promising player and he would arrange special coaching for her.Mr.Gill also asked Mr. Singh to send Seema to his office on August 12 todiscuss some detalls with her regarding the same. Next day Seema with her friend, Vidya, went to meet Mr. Gill at his officeafter their regular practice session. Which was in a schedule area of the tenniscourt. On seeing both of them Gill asked Vidya to go and call the tennis coach. But Vidya returned mid-way and saw to her horror thet Gill was molesting Seema inside his office. This incident shocked both Vidya and Seema and they somehow managed to get out of there and reached their home sefely.Three days later Seema mustered the courage to tell her father about the wholeepisode with Gill. On hearing the whole episode Mr. Singh along with Seema and Vidya’s mother went and filed a Complaint against Mr. Gill. The Complaint was signed by Seema herself stating that she was molested by Gill. After the complaint was filed Seema’s family was harassed by the police and various other authorities. Her brother was arrested on verious theft cases overnight. Seema was expelled from her school on the flimsy grounds of nonpayment of fees without any warning. Her father lost her job on alleged charges of corruption. After three years of bearing all the atrocities of the system and unable to sustain any more attacks on her family’s name Seema finally committed suicide on January 4 th 1993 by consuming poison. Gill who was an IGP of Haryana Police in the year 1990 was promoted to the post of DGP and awarded various medals and bestowed with various others laurels over the years. But it was only in the year 1999 that an FIR was registered against Gill under section -354 of IPC on the basis of the written complaint given by Seema in the year 1990. The investigation began, but still Gill was in Service and with all the medals and honour intact. The case was still pending in Punjab and Haryana High Court when it transferred the investigation of the case to the CBI. The case was finally transferred to CBI Special Magistrate by Punjab and Haryana High Court with the discretion to hold day-to-day hearings and to complete the trial within a month. Finally the courtfound Gill guilty of outraging the modesty of women and convicted him to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1000. Gill was allowed bail and he was also allowed appeal in the higher court .Aggrieved by the decision given by the court, Seema’s father and her friends’s Parents have filed a petition to re-open the case with the new charges of “abetment of suicide” being levelled against Gill in the Supreme Court of India. ISSUES 1. Whether Mr. Gill can be charged with the offence of “abetment of suicide”? 2. Whether the delay in filing FIR leads to delay in administrative justice which will prove dereliction of duty on the part of Government authorities? 3. Whether the present system of law is the reason behind such delays in filing FIR? 4. Whether Supreme Court has the Jurisdiction to open a fresh petition when there is always a right to appeal? 7Moot Proposition - XVIII Facts - Two Aressian states and others V Union of Aressia Aressia, is a South Asian country with a written constitution and a strong centralising tendency. Aressia is a land of many rivers which include trans-boundary Rivers. Its economy was mainly based agriculture and fishing. But in the past few decades there has been shortage of water, which lead to the failure of agriculture and commission of suicides by many farmers. In the year 2009, an Ngo named ACLU filed a writ petition in Hon'ble SC of Aressia citing the plight of the farmers, women folk and acute water shortages in the area. It pointed out many reasons for the shortage of water including industrial activity, agriculture an urban development. A study report was submitted showing the decline in the number of rivers in Aressia from the 1960's to the 1980's and then to 2000, from 782 to 324 out of which 50% of the latter were highly polluted.To address this issue, the ACLU suggested the linking of rivers across the country which the SC of Aressia considered and then directed the Central Government to constitute a high level expert committee to conduct a study on the project's viability. It also directed the Centre to constitute a committed to conduct Environment Impact Assessment and thus disposed the writ petition. In December 2009, the Centre appointed both the committees. The EIA committee comprised of representatives from various sections including environmental experts, concerned parties and both state and central government representatives. In May 2010. The High Level Expert Committee submitted a detailed report suggesting the linking of certain rivers to mitigate the water shortage problem. The EIA committee identified various social and environmental harms that could be caused by the project and suggested certain precautionary measures. The Linking of Rivers Act, 2010 was enacted in August 2010 under which, S.3 of the Act gave the Central Government the power to any measures deemed necessary for ensuring accessibility of water and linking of rivers all over the country. Further S.3 (3) of the Act provided for the constitution of an Authority for the exercise of such powers and performance of such functions necessary for linking rivers across the country. The Authority for Linking of Rivers (ALR) was constituted on the basis of this provision. The project was criticised by various State governments who cited their concerns, both environmental and otherwise. It was also criticised by various NGOs as being a political 38move to water to industries of some states and they also noted the risk of corruption. The Centre decided to shelve the project for the time being due to all the opposition to the project.In April 2011, there was a change in the Centre with the Democratic Progressive Alliance (DPA) coming into power. The new Prime Minister promised the Implementation of the project to provide water for drinking, sanitation, agricultural and industrial purposes. Due to the large financial burden, it was to be implemented in three phases. The ALR included six states, Somanda, Normanda, Adhali, Neruda, Vindhya and Parmala in the first phase. To date, all the rivers in these states belong exclusively to those them; but after inter-linking they will be interstate. This included the River Bhargavi which was a trans-boundary river flowing from Neruda to the neighbouring country of Boressia. The States of Adhali and Parmala have objected the move of the ALR and approached the Hon'ble SC of Aressia challenging the validity of the Act, arguing that S.3 is Ultra Vires to the Aressian Constitution and is an encroachment by the Centre on the States power.The state of Vindhya possesses the largest wetland in Aressia which has been included on the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance. A state EIA committee identified that the ILR project would harm the wetland and on the basis of its report, the Central Government directed the ALR to exclude the state from the ILR project.12 rivers from Vindhya were to be linked with rivers in Normanda which was facing a water Shortage. Farmers in both the states, formed the ‘Save the Farmers Forum’ and approached the Hon'ble SC of Aressia under Art 32 of the Constitution of Aressia to have a writ of mandamus issued. It was argued that non-implementation of the project would lead to violation of fundamental rights of the people of both states.In April 2013, the Boressian Minister of Forest and Agriculture on visit to the Union of ‘Aressia, requested the exclusion of the River Bhargavi from the first phase of the project. But it was rejected, considering the prospective benefits of its inclusion.The Forum for Environmental Right (FER), an international NGO with its head office in Boressia and a branch office in Boranda, the capital of Neruda approached the Hon'ble HC of Neruda challenging the inclusion of Bhargavi as being violative of the fundamental rights of the people of Boressia and destruction of the environment there. The writ petition was dismissed by the HC of Neruda on the acceptance of a preliminary objection raised by the respondents. An appeal has been preferred to the Hon’ble SC of Aressia.In March 2014, a news channel telecast an interview where some members of the EIA committee appointed by the Central Government disclosed that certain states could face various 39environmental disasters as a consequence of the ILR project. Four members, two representing NGOs and two representing the Central Government confessed to political Pressure for a favourable EIA report. This heavily publicised news caused wide spread protests against the ILR project.The Centre for Environmental Rights and Advocacy (CERA), an NGO approached the National Green Tribunal of Aressia, challenging the legality of the Linking of Rivers Act, 2010 on that grounds that it violated the environmental rights of the citizens of Aressia and also the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. It was dismissed and an appeal was preferred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Aressia. Issues I Whether the petition filed by the FER is maintainable in the High Court of Neruda? 2. Whether S.3 of the Linking of Rivers Act, 2010 is Ultra Vires the Constitution of Aressia? 3. Whether, the exclusion of and non-implementation of Linking of Rivers Project for the State of Vindhya is violative of fundamental rights of people of the States of Vindhya and Normanda? 4. Whether the Linking of Rivers Act, 2010 violates the environmental rights of the people of Aressia and the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 40Moot Propo: mn — XIX Facts - Mohan v Fatima Mohan, born as fourth child in family consisting of his father Raju alias Rahmatullah Khan, his mother Renuka alias Ria Khan and three siblings, used to live with his maternal grandparents who was Hindu. At the instance of observing different practices in family it was explained to him that his parents were also Hindu by birth, though belonging to a lower caste. For the reasons of such discriminatory practices against the people belonging to lower caste he decided to convert to Islam. Determined to bring about change in such discrimination he applied for seat in Guntur Medical College, but the converts to other religions from Hinduism were treated as backward classes thereby he didn“t get admission. On the advice, he got himself converted to Hinduism by going through Suddhi ceremony, claiming to be a member of Madiga caste he got admission as falling under Schedule Caste. In the fifth year of his study, he fall in love to a Muslim girl Fatima, though aware about their status in the society. The girl reasoned that she can convince her father for their marriage as they are both Muslims, but then Mohan disclosed about his conversion to Hinduism which made her feared that the marriage would not be accepted by her father as being strong follower of Islam. When she went home, got aware about the Preparations of her marriage to which Mohan insisted they should get married soon and under the emotional threat and pressure she agreed for such marriage. He made Fatima to undergo Suddhi ceremony, solemnized the marriage in a temple, thereafter also married under Muslim form wherein Qazi performed their marriage. When the girl felt guilty about the marriage, she confessed it to her father who convinced her to get out of this relationship as Mohan is not a trustworthy person. He made her to believe and migrated her to another medical college. When she stopped all her contacts with Mohan, he filed for Restitution of Conjugal Rights under the HMA, 1955 in Famil Court of Guntur, Andhra Pradesh. (SECTION 7 OF FAMILY COURTS ACT, 1984) 4Issues involved 1, Whether the conversion of Mohan is Valid ? 2. Whether the conversion of Fatima is invalid ? 3. Whether Restitution of Conjugal right be granted to Mohan? 42Moot Propositi in — XX Facts - Heena V Union of India And others On 11" April 2001, Ahmad and Heena got married as per Shariat at Allahabad, Heena was a devoted wife who performed all her duties intermittently. They had two children, Irfan a 13 year old son studying in 7th standard, and Naaz11 year old daughter, in 4" standard, both at Allahabad. In April 2015, Heena left her matrimonial home, as Ahmad started demanding cash and car from her father, Iqbal who was a government employee. She went to her paternal home, in Uttarakhand, along with her two children in the company of her father Iqbal and maternal uncle Rizwan. However, Ahmad continued to visit Heena for giving her maintenance, and for enquiring about her well-being. In June 2015 due to some differences Heena refused to accompany Ahmad to the matrimonial home. Ahmad also asked Iqbal to send Heena back to her matrimonial home. However after a few days Iqbal informed Ahmad that Heena was not inclined to live with him. But gave the two children to Ahmad on 7thJuly 2015, Ahmad approached the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court at Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, by filing a sult for restitution of conjugal rights. Heena, filed a Transfer Petition undersection 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, read with Order XXXVI-B of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966,for the transfer of Matrimonial Case, filed by the husband pending at Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kashipur, Uttarakhand. Ahmad withdrew the suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by him at the Family court in Allahabad and preferred to divorce Heena by pronouncing Triple Talaq thus severing the matrimonial ties, by serving upon her a talaq-nama” dated 10.10. 2015. Aggrieved by the divorce Heena has sought a declaration, from the Supreme Court that the talaq e- biddat (Triple Talaq)pronounced by her husband on 10.10.2015 be declared as void ab initio. She has also contented that such a divorce which abruptly, unilaterally and irrevocably terminates the ties of matrimony, purportedly under Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, be declared unconstitutional. 43«+ Issues Involved 1. Whether the writ is maintainable ? 2. Whether the talaq pronounced by ahmad is void abinitio? 3. Whether Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law ( Shariat ) Appliction Act 1937 un constitutional ? 44