Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    Journal

    Uploaded by

    ashishdalal.sls
    This document outlines the learning objectives, outcomes, and structure of a Clinical Course - IV on Moot Court Exercises and Internship for 5th year BA/BBA LLB (Hons.) students at Symbiosis Law School, Pune for the academic year 2021-2022. The course aims to enable students to understand the application of law in practice, prepare cases, understand court proceedings, and develop interviewing and advocacy skills. It involves participating in 3 moot courts, observing 1 civil case and 1 criminal trial, conducting interviewing sessions, completing internships, and appearing for a viva voce examination. The course will help students gain practical legal experience and skills required to work as lawyers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Journal

    Uploaded by

    ashishdalal.sls
    14 views64 pages
    This document outlines the learning objectives, outcomes, and structure of a Clinical Course - IV on Moot Court Exercises and Internship for 5th year BA/BBA LLB (Hons.) students at Symbiosis Law School, Pune for the academic year 2021-2022. The course aims to enable students to understand the application of law in practice, prepare cases, understand court proceedings, and develop interviewing and advocacy skills. It involves participating in 3 moot courts, observing 1 civil case and 1 criminal trial, conducting interviewing sessions, completing internships, and appearing for a viva voce examination. The course will help students gain practical legal experience and skills required to work as lawyers.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document outlines the learning objectives, outcomes, and structure of a Clinical Course - IV on Moot Court Exercises and Internship for 5th year BA/BBA LLB (Hons.) students at Symbiosis Law School, Pune for the academic year 2021-2022. The course aims to enable students to understand the application of law in practice, prepare cases, understand court proceedings, and develop interviewing and advocacy skills. It involves participating in 3 moot courts, observing 1 civil case and 1 criminal trial, conducting interviewing sessions, completing internships, and appearing for a viva voce examination. The course will help students gain practical legal experience and skills required to work as lawyers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    14 views64 pages

    Journal

    Uploaded by

    ashishdalal.sls
    This document outlines the learning objectives, outcomes, and structure of a Clinical Course - IV on Moot Court Exercises and Internship for 5th year BA/BBA LLB (Hons.) students at Symbiosis Law School, Pune for the academic year 2021-2022. The course aims to enable students to understand the application of law in practice, prepare cases, understand court proceedings, and develop interviewing and advocacy skills. It involves participating in 3 moot courts, observing 1 civil case and 1 criminal trial, conducting interviewing sessions, completing internships, and appearing for a viva voce examination. The course will help students gain practical legal experience and skills required to work as lawyers.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 64

    SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, PUNE

    Care | Courage | Competence | Collaboration

    CONSTITUENT OF
    SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED UNIVERSITY)
    Reaccredited by NAAC with 'A' Grade

    Symbiosis Campus, Opp. Pune International Airport,


    Symbiosis Road, Viman Nagar, Pune 411 014.

    CLINICAL COURSE - IV - JOURNAL


    (MOOT COURT EXERCISE AND INTERNSHIP)
    V YEAR OF BA./BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

    Academic Year : 2021-2022


    SEMESTER - X

    Name of Student :

    Exam. Seat No. :

    Roll No. : Div. :

    Batch : Programme : BA. / BB.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

    PRN No.: Mobile No. :

    E-mail ID :
    CLINICAL COURSE - IV
    (MOOT COURT EXERCISE AND INTERNSHIP)

    Learning Objectives:
    1. To enable the student to understand not only the application of law in practice, but also the
    citation of relevant rulings and the art of convincing the judges.
    2. To train the students in methodical preparation of the case for achieving success as a lawyer
    and further train in proper presentation of the case and come out with a clear statement of
    points in controversy.
    3. To facilitate the students to attend Civil Case and Criminal Trial Proceedings and observe the
    proceedings in the court so as to understand the functional aspects of the components of the
    Indian legal justice system.
    4. To make the students understand how to deal with the client and collect the relevant
    information.
    5. To understand the nature of the case, issues involved in the case through the method of
    interview technique.
    6. To understand and apply the formats of the memorials and other documents submitted to the
    court.
    7. To study and understand pre-trail preparations and preparation of documents and court papers
    by the advocates.

    Learning Outcomes:
    At the end of the course the student will:
    1. understand not only the application of low in practice, but also the citation of relevant ruling
    and the art of convincing the judges.
    2. be also to prepare the case for achieving success as a lawyer and further the student will able to
    present the case and come out with a clear statement of points in controversy.
    3. be able to understand working of the Civil Case and Criminal Trial Proceedings.
    4. be able to deal with the client and collect the relevant information.
    5. be in position to understand the nature of the case, issues involved in the case using interview
    technique.
    6. be able to understand and apply formats of memorial and other documents in the court practice.
    7. be able to prepare memorial and other documents required for court proceedings.

    1) Moot Courts (30 Marks)


    Every student will do at least 3 moot courts in this semester with 10 marks for each. The
    moot courts work will be on assigned problems and it will be evaluated for 5 marks for
    written submission and 5 marks for oral advocacy.

    2) Observation of Civil Proceedings (15 Marks)


    Students will attend one Civil Case Proceeding in this semester. A student will submit a
    report for the work done in this semester and all submissions and assignments will be
    written in the format provided by the SLS, Pune. A student will maintain a record of all the
    steps observed in the trial (including the facts of the case, arguments and orders) and the
    days of court attendance in the report.

    3) Observation of Trial (15 Marks)


    Students will attend one Criminal Trial in this semester. A student will submit a report for
    the work done in this semester and all submissions and assignments will be made as per the
    format provided by SLS, Pune. A student will maintain a record of all the steps observed in
    the trial (including the facts of the case, arguments and orders) and the days of court
    attendance in the report.

    1
    4) Interviewing Techniques and Pre-trial Preparations & Internships (30 Marks)
    4.1 Interviewing sessions
    4.1.1. Interviewing session-I
    4.1.2. Interviewing session - II
    A report should be prepared as per the format provided by SLS, Pune
    4.1.3. Preparation of Documents and Court Papers by the Advocates and Procedures for
    filing Petition/ Suit etc. A report should be prepared as per the format provided by SLS,
    Pune.

    5) Internships (30 Marks)


    4.2.1. Internship I (10 Marks)
    4.2.2. Internship II (10 Marks)
    4.2.3. Internship III (10 Marks)

    6) Viva-Voce (30 Marks)

    Books Recommended :
    — Sue Painter - Thorne, Karen J. Sneddon, Moot Court Workbook: Finding Educational Success
    and Competition Glory, Wolters Khuwer (2017)
    — John Snape, Gary Watt, How to Moot : A Student Guide to Mooting, Oxford University Press
    (2010)
    — Sarah L. Cooper, Scarlett McArdle, Preparing to Moot : A Step-by-Step Guide to Mooting,
    Routledge (Taylor& Francis Group) (2017)

    2
    INDEX
    Sr. No. Description of Practical Training Page No. Marks Obtained

    1. MOOT COURTS (30 Marks)


    a) Moot Court - I (10 Marks)
    b) Moot Court - II (10 Marks)
    c) Moot Court - III (10 Marks)

    2. OBSERVATION OF CIVIL CASE PROCEEDINGS:


    (15 Marks)

    3. OBSERVATION OF CRIMINAL TRIAL :


    (15 Marks)

    4. INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUES AND PRE-TRIAL


    PREPARATIONS & INTERNSHIPS: (30 Marks)
    4.1 Interviewing Sessions
    4.1.1. Interviewing Session - I
    4.1.2. Interviewing Session - II
    4.1.3. Preparation of Documents and Court Papers by the
    Advocates & the Procedure for filing Petition/ Suit
    etc.

    5. Internships (30 Marks)


    5.1 Internship I (10 Marks)
    5.2 Internship II (10 Marks)
    5.3 Internship III (10 Marks)

    6. VIVA-VOCE (30 Marks)

    3
    MOOTCOURT–I

    I
    NTHEHI
    GHCOURTOFBOMBAY,
    MAHARASHTRA
    CWPNO.2349of2022

    I
    NTHEMATTEROF

    1.MR.ROHAN .
    .PETI
    TIONER

    VERSUS

    2.STATEOFMAHARASHTRA&ORS. .
    .RESPONDENTNO1

    3.KABMEDI
    AHOUSEPVTLTD. .
    .RESPONDENTNO2

    REPLYTOTHEWRI
    TPETI
    TIONUNDERARTI
    CLE226OFTHEI
    NDI
    ANCONSTI
    TUTI
    ON
    PRAYI
    NG FOR DI
    RECTI
    ON OR ORDER I
    N THE NATURE OF PROHI
    BITI
    NG THE
    RESPONDENTS,
    PROHI
    BITI
    NGTHEM FROM CARRYI
    NGOUTAMEDI
    ATRAI
    LFURTHER
    WI
    TH DI
    SCI
    PLI
    NARY PROCEEDI
    NG ON BASI
    S OF ENQUI
    RY REPORTS BY
    RESPONDENTNO.2.

    MEMORI
    ALFORTHERESPONDENT

    JURI
    SDI
    CTI
    ON:Thi
    sHon’
    bleBombayHi
    ghCour
    tofI
    ndi
    ahasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    oent
    ert
    ain
    t
    hepr
    esentwr
    itpet
    it
    ionunderAr
    ti
    cle226oft
    heConst
    it
    uti
    onofI
    ndi
    a,whi
    chr
    eadsas
    f
    oll
    ows:

    “
    226.PowerofHi
    ghCour
    tst
    oissuecer
    tai
    nwr
    it
    s:

    (
    1) Not
    wit
    hst
    andi
    ngany
    thi
    ngi
    nAr
    ti
    cle32ev
    eryHi
    ghCour
    tshal
    l
    hav
    e power
    s,t
    hroughoutt
    he t
    err
    it
    ori
    es i
    nrel
    ati
    on t
    o whi
    ch i
    t
    exer
    cisesj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    on,
    toi
    ssuet
    oanyper
    sonoraut
    hor
    it
    y,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngi
    n
    appr
    opr
    iat
    e cases, any Gov
    ernment
    , wi
    thi
    n t
    hose t
    err
    it
    ori
    es’
    di
    rect
    ions,or
    der
    s,orwr
    it
    s,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngwr
    it
    sint
    henat
    ureofhabeas
    cor
    pus,mandamus,pr
    ohi
    bit
    ions,quowar
    rant
    oandcer
    ti
    orar
    i,orany
    oft
    hem,
    fort
    heenf
    orcementofanyoft
    her
    ight
    sconf
    err
    edbyPar
    tII
    I
    andf
    oranyot
    herpur
    pose

    (
    2) Thepowerconf
    err
    edbycl
    ause(
    1)t
    oissuedi
    rect
    ions,or
    der
    sor
    wr
    it
    stoanyGov
    ernment
    ,aut
    hor
    it
    yorper
    sonmayal
    sobeexer
    cised
    byanyHi
    ghCour
    texer
    cisi
    ngj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    oni
    nrel
    ati
    ont
    othet
    err
    it
    ori
    es
    wi
    thi
    nwhi
    cht
    hecauseofact
    ion,whol
    l
    yori
    npar
    t,ar
    isesf
    ort
    he
    exer
    cise ofsuch power
    ,not
    wit
    hst
    andi
    ng t
    hatt
    he seatofsuch
    Gov
    ernmentoraut
    hor
    it
    yort
    her
    esi
    denceofsuchper
    soni
    snotwi
    thi
    n
    t
    hoset
    err
    it
    ori
    es.

    FACTS

    Mr
    .Rohanwaschar
    gedwi
    thr
    ashandcar
    elessdr
    ivi
    ng,
    aswel
    last
    hemur
    derofMs.
    Sur
    ahi
    .BecauseMs.Sur
    ahii
    sthedaught
    erofawel
    l
    -knownpol
    i
    tici
    an,Mr
    .Kodi
    ,the
    i
    nci
    dentwascl
    osel
    ywat
    chedbyt
    hemedi
    a.KAB,aBKCor
    por
    ati
    on-
    ownednews
    st
    ati
    on,pr
    oduced a speci
    alr
    epor
    tthathi
    ghl
    i
    ght
    ed t
    he i
    ssues,ev
    idence,and
    i
    nvest
    igat
    ivei
    ssues,
    aswel
    last
    hel
    i
    kel
    i
    hoodofacor
    rupti
    nvest
    igat
    ingof
    fi
    ceri
    nthe
    case.ASessi
    onsj
    udgesawt
    her
    epor
    taf
    teri
    twasr
    eleasedt
    oYouTube.Asar
    esul
    t,
    t
    heSessi
    ons,andDi
    str
    ictCour
    t("
    SDC"
    )(a)or
    der
    edanew i
    nqui
    ryandr
    equest
    ed
    KAB'
    sev
    idencesuomot
    o,(
    b)or
    der
    edCCTVf
    oot
    agef
    rom t
    hemuni
    cipalcor
    por
    ati
    on,
    and(
    c)sentaj
    udget
    othemur
    derl
    ocat
    iont
    ogat
    hermor
    eev
    idence.Mr
    .Kompr
    aj,
    t
    heownerofat
    east
    andneart
    hecr
    imescene,wasal
    sosummonedt
    ogi
    vehi
    s
    account
    .TheSDCr
    eli
    edsi
    gni
    fi
    cant
    lyont
    hemandat
    edmat
    eri
    alandCCTVf
    oot
    agei
    n
    i
    tsev
    ent
    ualdeci
    sion.Mr
    .Rohanwaschar
    gedandconv
    ict
    edf
    orcul
    pabl
    ehomi
    cide
    amount
    ingt
    omur
    deraf
    tert
    heSDCcher
    ry-
    pickedev
    idence.Mr
    .Rohanpet
    it
    ionedt
    he
    BombayHi
    ghCour
    tunderAr
    ti
    cle226oft
    heI
    ndi
    anConst
    it
    uti
    on.

    I
    SSUE(
    S)

    1.Ar
    ether
    eli
    mit
    ati
    onsonmedi
    atr
    ial
    whencase/
    mat
    teri
    ssubj
    udi
    ce?
    2.Ar
    eSuomot
    oact
    ionsandact
    ivi
    sm byaj
    udgei
    nthepr
    esentcaseagai
    nstbasi
    c
    t
    enet
    soft
    hecommonl
    awsy
    stem andt
    heCr
    imi
    nal
    Procedur
    eCode,
    1973?
    3.I
    sjudgmenti
    ntheabsenceofar
    gumentonev
    idencev
    ali
    d
    SUMMARYOFARGUMENTS

    I
    SSUEI
    :Ar
    ether
    eli
    mit
    ati
    onsonmedi
    atr
    ialwhencase/
    mat
    teri
    ssubj
    udi
    ce?

    [
    1.1]TheI
    ndi
    anmedi
    aenj
    oyst
    wo-
    fol
    dpr
    otect
    ionundert
    heConst
    it
    uti
    onofI
    ndi
    a,
    andt
    heSupr
    emeCour
    t("
    SC"
    )hasgr
    ant
    edt
    hesameonsev
    eralt
    imes,i
    tis
    r
    espect
    ful
    l
    ymai
    ntai
    nedt
    hatt
    her
    ear
    enoconst
    rai
    ntsf
    ormedi
    atr
    ialwhent
    he
    case/
    mat
    teri
    sunderj
    udi
    cial
    rev
    iew.

    [
    1.2]TheI
    ndi
    anmedi
    aispr
    otect
    edi
    ntwoway
    sundert
    heI
    ndi
    anConst
    it
    uti
    on.
    Themedi
    a,somet
    imesknownasademocr
    acy
    's"
    Four
    thEst
    ate,
    "wor
    ksi
    nuni
    son
    wi
    tht
    heot
    hert
    hreei
    nst
    it
    uti
    onsofgov
    ernment
    :thel
    egi
    slat
    ure,execut
    ive,and
    j
    udi
    ciar
    y.Thef
    reedom ofeachoft
    hef
    ourest
    ates,accor
    dingt
    oconst
    it
    uti
    onal
    r
    est
    ri
    cti
    onsandnat
    ionali
    nter
    est
    s,i
    sanecessar
    ypr
    econdi
    ti
    onf
    ort
    hef
    unct
    ioni
    ng
    1
    ofademocr
    ati
    csy
    stem. Thej
    oboft
    hemedi
    aist
    oinf
    orm andeducat
    esoci
    ety
    sot
    hati
    ndi
    vi
    dual
    scanmakeeducat
    edj
    udgment
    s.I
    nthi
    sway
    ,themedi
    akeeps
    t
    hepubl
    i
    cinf
    ormedaboutanyoddi
    ti
    est
    orev
    ealpot
    ent
    iall
    egalv
    iol
    ati
    ons.The
    medi
    a,l
    i
    keev
    eryot
    heraspectoft
    henat
    ion,
    isaf
    for
    dedcer
    tai
    nsaf
    eguar
    dsunder
    t
    heI
    ndi
    anConst
    it
    uti
    on.Thef
    reedom ofspeechandexpr
    essi
    on,aswel
    last
    he
    f
    reedom t
    o engage i
    n anybusi
    ness,pr
    ovi
    de t
    he medi
    a wi
    tht
    wo l
    ayer
    s of
    pr
    otect
    ion.The I
    ndi
    an medi
    a oper
    ates based on const
    it
    uti
    onalf
    reedom of
    speechandexpr
    essi
    on,whi
    chi
    sal
    sor
    ecogni
    zedbyt
    heUni
    tedNat
    ionsChar
    ter
    .
    Whi
    l
    etheConst
    it
    uti
    on'
    sor
    igi
    nalt
    extdoesnotdef
    inef
    reedom,
    theSupr
    emeCour
    t
    hasconcl
    udedt
    hati
    tincl
    udest
    her
    ightt
    ofr
    eel
    yexpr
    essone'
    sbel
    i
    efs,whet
    her
    or
    all
    y,i
    nwr
    it
    ing,bypi
    ctor
    ialr
    epr
    esent
    ati
    on,ori
    nanyot
    herv
    isualmedi
    um.I
    n
    anot
    herdeci
    sion,t
    heSupr
    emeCour
    tst
    atedt
    hatt
    heConst
    it
    uti
    onensur
    est
    he
    r
    ightt
    oacqui
    rei
    nfor
    mat
    iononsubj
    ect
    sofpubl
    i
    cimpor
    tancei
    naddi
    ti
    ont
    othe
    f
    reedom ofspeechandexpr
    essi
    on.Whi
    l
    ebr
    oadf
    reedom i
    sther
    efor
    eensur
    ed,i
    t
    2
    i
    sal
    soaccept
    edt
    hatt
    hef
    reedom i
    sli
    mit
    ed.

    Ther
    ightt
    opr
    act
    iceanypr
    ofessi
    on,i
    naddi
    ti
    ont
    othef
    reedom ofspeechand

    1
    (
    1985)1SCC641atp.664,
    par
    a32.
    2
    ManekaGandhi
    v.Uni
    onofI
    ndi
    a,(
    1978)1SCC248
    expr
    essi
    on,pr
    ovi
    desconst
    it
    uti
    onal
    i
    tyt
    othemedi
    a.I
    nfact
    ,Ar
    ti
    cle19(
    1)(
    g)i
    s
    cr
    it
    ical
    sincei
    tper
    mit
    sIndi
    anci
    ti
    zenst
    obewel
    l
    -inf
    ormedt
    hroughv
    ari
    ousout
    let
    s
    3
    l
    i
    ke as t
    he medi
    a and t
    he i
    nter
    net
    . I
    tis ar
    gued t
    hatt
    he medi
    a'
    s dual
    i
    ndependence per
    mit
    sitt
    o conductmedi
    atr
    ial
    sto al
    ertt
    he publ
    i
    c ofany
    mi
    sst
    epsdur
    ingacaset
    hatmayhar
    m publ
    i
    ctr
    usti
    nthej
    udi
    ciar
    y.

    [
    1.3]TheSupr
    emeCour
    thasbackedmedi
    atr
    ial
    sonsev
    eraloccasi
    ons.The
    Supr
    emeCour
    thaspr
    evi
    ousl
    yst
    atedt
    hatwhi
    l
    eacasei
    sint
    hemi
    ddl
    eoft
    he
    l
    egalpr
    ocess,medi
    atr
    iali
    sper
    mit
    ted,subj
    ectt
    ocer
    tai
    nchecksandbal
    ances.
    Det
    ermi
    ningwhenat
    opi
    cbecomes"
    sub-
    judi
    ce"i
    sanot
    heri
    ssuet
    hatmayar
    ise.
    I
    nthi
    sregar
    d,t
    heSupr
    emeCour
    thasconcl
    udedt
    hatr
    est
    ri
    cti
    ngf
    reedom of
    speechandexpr
    essi
    onbef
    oreanyar
    restwoul
    dbei
    l
    legal
    ;iti
    sther
    esponsi
    bil
    i
    ty
    oft
    hef
    reepr
    essandmedi
    atocommentonsuchmat
    ter
    stobr
    ingt
    hem t
    othe
    publ
    i
    c'sat
    tent
    ionandadj
    udi
    cat
    ethei
    rreal
    i
    ty.I
    tishumbl
    yasser
    tedt
    hat
    ,gi
    ven
    exi
    sti
    ngj
    uri
    spr
    udenceandt
    hecl
    ari
    tyofl
    egalr
    ules,t
    her
    ear
    enor
    est
    ri
    cti
    onson
    medi
    atr
    ialwhenacasei
    sunderconsi
    der
    ati
    on.KABdev
    elopedauni
    quer
    epor
    tin
    t
    hiscaset
    ohi
    ghl
    i
    ghtt
    hei
    ssues,ev
    idence,andi
    nvest
    igat
    ionchal
    l
    engesi
    nthe
    Rohancase.KAB’
    sst
    udyr
    aisedt
    hepr
    ospectofacor
    rupti
    nvest
    igat
    iveof
    fi
    cer
    ,
    4
    whi
    chi
    saser
    iousconcer
    nfort
    hecount
    ry'
    sost
    ensi
    bly"
    independentj
    udi
    ciar
    y."

    I
    SSUEI
    I:Ar
    eSuomot
    oact
    ionsandact
    ivi
    sm byaj
    udgei
    nthepr
    esentcaseagai
    nst
    basi
    ctenet
    soft
    hecommonl
    awsy
    stem andt
    heCr
    imi
    nalPr
    ocedur
    eCode,
    1973?

    [
    2.1]Ar
    ti
    cle 32 oft
    he I
    ndi
    an Const
    it
    uti
    on and Ar
    ti
    cle 226 oft
    he I
    ndi
    an
    Const
    it
    uti
    on,r
    espect
    ivel
    y,est
    abl
    i
    sh t
    he pr
    ocedur
    es f
    orf
    il
    ing Publ
    i
    cInt
    erest
    Li
    ti
    gat
    ion(
    PIL)i
    nIndi
    a'
    sSupr
    emeCour
    tandHi
    ghCour
    ts.Asar
    esul
    t,t
    hecour
    t
    now hast
    heaut
    hor
    it
    ytot
    akel
    egalact
    ionuponr
    ecei
    vi
    ngnot
    iceofasi
    tuat
    ion.
    SuoMot
    omov
    esbyI
    ndi
    ancour
    tsi
    ndi
    cat
    ejudi
    cialact
    ivi
    sm,andt
    hepubl
    i
    chas
    beeni
    ntr
    iguedbyt
    hecour
    ts'f
    astdel
    i
    ver
    yofj
    ust
    ice.SuoMot
    o mat
    ter
    sar
    e
    usual
    l
    yhear
    d byI
    ndi
    a'
    sSupr
    emeCour
    t.Fort
    hepastf
    ew y
    ear
    s,t
    heI
    ndi
    an
    5
    j
    udi
    ciar
    yhasunquest
    ionabl
    ycar
    ri
    edt
    hedemocr
    ati
    cbat
    on. Sev
    eralHi
    ghCour
    ts

    3
    (1994)2SCC434
    4
    Indi
    anExpressNewspaper
    s(Bombay)(
    P)Lt
    d.v
    .Uni
    onofI
    ndi
    a,(
    1985)1SCC641
    5
    SubhashChandrav.S.M.Agar
    wal
    ,1984Cri
    LJ481(
    Del
    )
    andt
    heSupr
    emeCour
    thav
    eri
    sent
    otheoccasi
    oni
    nthepastbyt
    aki
    ngsol
    e
    cogni
    zanceofal
    egali
    ssueanddel
    i
    ver
    ingf
    astj
    ust
    ice.SuoMot
    ocogni
    zancehas
    al
    sobeenusedbyI
    ndi
    ancour
    tsi
    nthef
    oll
    owi
    ngi
    nst
    ances:
    1.Cour
    tsmaybegi
    nSuoMot
    ocont
    emptpr
    oceedi
    ngsagai
    nstanof
    fi
    cerwho
    obst
    ruct
    sthedel
    i
    ver
    yofj
    ust
    iceorj
    eopar
    dizest
    hecour
    t'
    sdi
    gni
    tyt
    hrough
    di
    sobedi
    encet
    othecour
    tand al
    ackofknowl
    edgeoft
    her
    ulesand
    6
    r
    egul
    ati
    ons,
    codeofconduct
    ,andet
    hicst
    hatappl
    yinacour
    t.
    2.ReopenOl
    dCases:Ev
    ent
    houghacasehasbeencl
    oseandnew and
    subst
    ant
    ialev
    idencei
    suncov
    ered,t
    hecour
    tshav
    etheaut
    hor
    it
    ytot
    ake
    SuoMot
    oact
    ionandr
    eopent
    hecasesot
    hati
    tcanbet
    ri
    edagai
    n.
    3.Or
    deraNew CaseI
    nvest
    igat
    ion:I
    facour
    tbel
    i
    evest
    hatanaggr
    iev
    ed
    per
    sonoragr
    oupofper
    sonsi
    sbei
    ngt
    reat
    edunf
    air
    ly,t
    hecour
    tcanor
    der
    ani
    nvest
    igat
    ionatanyl
    evelbyanygov
    ernmentaut
    hor
    it
    y,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngt
    he
    pol
    i
    cedepar
    tment
    ,theCBI
    ,andot
    her
    s.Thecour
    tmayal
    sot
    akesuch
    act
    ionaf
    terr
    ecei
    vi
    ngal
    ett
    erf
    rom agr
    oupofpeopl
    ewhohav
    ebeen
    af
    fect
    edorbasedonanynews,
    document
    ary
    ,ormedi
    asour
    ce.

    [
    2.2]Ar
    ti
    cle131oft
    heI
    ndi
    anConst
    it
    uti
    ongr
    ant
    sthehi
    ghestcour
    ttheaut
    hor
    it
    y
    ofSuoMot
    o.SuoMot
    ohasensur
    edt
    hatj
    ust
    icei
    sser
    vedi
    nbot
    hci
    vi
    land
    cr
    imi
    nalsi
    tuat
    ionsi
    nIndi
    a.SuoMot
    ohasl
    ongbeenacknowl
    edgedi
    ntheI
    ndi
    an
    Const
    it
    uti
    on,
    andt
    heI
    ndi
    anj
    udi
    ciar
    yhasr
    epeat
    edl
    ydemonst
    rat
    edi
    tsst
    rengt
    hby
    t
    aki
    ngupSuoMot
    ocases.TheHon'
    bl
    eSupr
    emeCour
    thast
    akenacasef
    orSuo
    Mot
    o hear
    ing on a l
    ett
    er-
    pet
    it
    ion made bySmt
    .Mahua Moi
    tr
    a,Memberof
    Par
    li
    ament
    ,aboutmi
    grantl
    abor
    ers and t
    hei
    rcondi
    ti
    ons,dur
    ing COVI
    D-19
    7
    Lockdown. TheSupr
    emeCour
    thasal
    sot
    akenacaseont
    hest
    ateofchi
    l
    dren'
    s
    8
    pr
    otect
    ionhomesacr
    osst
    hecount
    ryonasuomot
    obasi
    s. TheSupr
    emeCour
    t
    hadal
    sot
    akennot
    iceofj
    ailov
    erpopul
    ati
    onar
    oundt
    hecount
    ry.Fur
    ther
    mor
    e,i
    n
    consi
    der
    ingt
    heSuoMot
    uCogni
    zanceofNon-
    Avai
    l
    abi
    l
    ityofMi
    d-DayMeal
    sfor
    Chi
    l
    dren,
    theHon'
    bl
    eSupr
    emeCour
    tst
    atedt
    hat"
    whi
    l
    edeal
    i
    ngwi
    thonepr
    obl
    em,
    9
    t
    hesi
    tuat
    ionmaynotl
    eadt
    othef
    ormat
    ionofanot
    hercr
    isi
    s."

    6
    Dm v.MAHami dAliGar
    dish,AI
    R1940Oudh137
    7
    MahuaMoi t
    raVersusUni
    onofI ndi
    a[WritPet
    iti
    on(Civi
    l
    )No.470Of2020]
    8
    In Re Contagi
    on of Covid 19 Vir
    us i n Chil
    drenProt
    ecti
    onHomes[SuoMot
    oWr i
    tPet
    it
    ion
    (Ci
    vi
    l)No.4Of2020]
    9
    InRe:Cont
    agionofCovi
    d19Vi rusi
    nPrisons[SuoMot oWritPeti
    ti
    on(
    Civ
    il
    )No.
    1Of2020]
    I
    SSUEI
    II
    :Isj
    udgmenti
    ntheabsenceofar
    gumentonev
    idencev
    ali
    d?

    I
    tisr
    espect
    ful
    l
    yasser
    tedt
    hat
    ,int
    heabsenceofanev
    idencear
    gument
    ,thev
    erdi
    ctof
    t
    heSessi
    onandDi
    str
    ictCour
    tint
    hecaseofSt
    ateofMahar
    asht
    rav
    .Rohani
    sval
    i
    d,
    ast
    hecaser
    eli
    edsol
    elyonCCTVf
    oot
    ageandwi
    tnessaccount
    s.I
    nthi
    scase,i
    tis
    r
    espect
    ful
    l
    yar
    guedt
    hatt
    heel
    ect
    roni
    cev
    idencer
    eli
    edon,
    andt
    hewi
    tnessst
    atement
    r
    eli
    edonandar
    ebot
    hadmi
    ssi
    blewi
    thoutdebat
    e.

    [
    3.1]Theel
    ect
    roni
    cev
    idenceusedi
    swi
    thoutadoubtadmi
    ssi
    ble.

    TheSessi
    onsandDi
    str
    ictj
    udgesr
    eli
    edonel
    ect
    roni
    cev
    idencei
    nthef
    orm ofCCTV
    f
    oot
    age.TheI
    ndi
    anEv
    idenceAct
    ,1872,Sect
    ion65B,i
    sacompr
    ehensi
    vecodef
    or
    el
    ect
    roni
    crecor
    dev
    idence,accor
    dingt
    otheSupr
    emeCour
    t.UnderSect
    ion65Bof
    t
    heI
    ndi
    anEv
    idenceAct
    ,1872,t
    hepar
    ti
    esar
    enotobl
    i
    gat
    edt
    oinspectt
    heel
    ect
    roni
    c
    r
    ecor
    d.Accor
    dingt
    o Sect
    ion59oft
    heI
    ndi
    anEv
    idenceActof1872,el
    ect
    roni
    c
    ev
    idencedoesnotr
    equi
    reor
    alev
    idencet
    obepr
    oven.Fur
    ther
    mor
    e,t
    heHon'
    bl
    e
    Supr
    eme Cour
    thas det
    ermi
    ned t
    hatCCTV f
    oot
    age i
    sthe bestev
    idence f
    or
    ascer
    tai
    ningt
    heposi
    ti
    onoft
    heaccusedi
    nrel
    ati
    ont
    othecr
    imesceneundert
    hebest
    ev
    idencepr
    inci
    pleofcr
    imi
    nall
    aw.Asar
    esul
    t,i
    tismai
    ntai
    nedt
    hatt
    heCCTVf
    il
    m
    waspr
    ocedur
    all
    yadmi
    ssi
    bleandr
    elev
    antt
    othecasel
    aw i
    nthi
    scase,maki
    ng
    r
    eli
    anceont
    hei
    nfor
    mat
    ionf
    ort
    hev
    erdi
    ctl
    egali
    nthel
    ackofconv
    ersat
    ionsont
    he
    mat
    ter
    .

    [
    3.2]Thewi
    tnessst
    atementr
    eli
    edoni
    sadmi
    ssi
    blewi
    thoutanyobj
    ect
    ions.

    I
    nNat
    ashaSi
    nghv
    .CBI
    ,theSupr
    emeCour
    tconcl
    udedt
    hataj
    udge'
    scal
    l
    ingofa
    wi
    tnessi
    slegi
    ti
    mat
    eunderSect
    ion311oft
    heCr
    PC,whi
    chempower
    sanyCour
    t,at
    anypoi
    nt,t
    osummonawi
    tnesswhoset
    est
    imonyi
    sdeemedr
    elev
    antbyt
    hej
    udge.
    Thi
    sar
    ti
    clegi
    vest
    hecour
    tconsi
    der
    abl
    edi
    scr
    eti
    onar
    ypower
    s,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngt
    hepowert
    o
    summonwi
    tnesseswi
    thoutt
    heappr
    ovaloft
    hepar
    ti
    es.Thecr
    oss-
    exami
    nat
    ionof
    t
    hewi
    tnesswho t
    est
    if
    iedatt
    het
    ri
    ali
    sthesecondl
    evelofmat
    eri
    al.Whenan
    opponentr
    efusest
    ousecr
    oss-
    exami
    nat
    iont
    oexpl
    ainhi
    sessent
    ialandsubst
    ant
    ial
    posi
    ti
    on,i
    tisr
    easonabl
    etopr
    esumet
    hathebel
    i
    evest
    het
    est
    imonygi
    vencannotbe
    di
    sput
    edi
    nanyway
    .It
    'sacommonmi
    sconcept
    iont
    hatt
    hisi
    smer
    elyat
    echni
    cal
    rul
    e
    ofev
    idence.I
    tisabasi
    cpr
    inci
    pleofj
    ust
    ice.Asar
    esul
    t,i
    tishel
    dthatt
    hepar
    ti
    es'
    r
    efusalt
    oquest
    iont
    hepr
    esentwi
    tnessamount
    edt
    oanacknowl
    edgementoft
    he
    t
    est
    imony
    ,soest
    abl
    i
    shi
    ngt
    hel
    egal
    i
    tyoft
    hev
    erdi
    ctbasedont
    hisev
    idence.
    PRAYER

    Asa r
    esul
    t,i
    n vi
    ew oft
    hepr
    obl
    emspr
    esent
    ed,ar
    gument
    sadvanced,and
    aut
    hor
    it
    iesr
    efer
    enced,i
    tisr
    espect
    ful
    l
    ypr
    ayedt
    hatt
    hisHon'
    bleCour
    tadj
    udge
    anddecl
    are:
    1.Thatt
    hepet
    it
    ionbedi
    rect
    edt
    opayt
    her
    espondentno.2f
    ort
    hehar
    m caused
    byt
    hisf
    ri
    vol
    ouspet
    it
    ion.
    2.Thatt
    hepet
    it
    ionbedi
    smi
    ssedwi
    thcost
    sduet
    othepet
    it
    ion'
    smal
    afi
    denat
    ure.
    OR,i
    nthei
    nter
    est
    sofj
    ust
    ice,equal
    i
    ty,andgoodconsci
    ence,passanyot
    her
    or
    der
    ,di
    rect
    ion,
    orr
    eli
    eft
    hatt
    hisHon'
    bl
    eCour
    tdeemsappr
    opr
    iat
    e.
    CASES

    1.Pr
    int
    ers(
    Mysor
    e)Lt
    dvsAsst
    t.Commer
    cialTaxOf
    fi
    ceron7Febr
    uar
    y1994
    (
    1994)2SCC434.

    2.I
    ndi
    anExpr
    essNewspaper
    s(Bombay
    )(P)Lt
    d.v
    .Uni
    onofI
    ndi
    a,(
    1985)1SCC
    641

    3.SubhashChandr
    av.S.M.Agar
    wal
    ,1984Cr
    iLJ481(
    Del
    ).

    4.Dm v
    .MAHami
    dAl
    iGar
    dish,
    AIR1940Oudh137.

    5.Sahar
    aIndi
    aRealEst
    ateCor
    por
    ati
    onLt
    d.AndOr
    s.Vs.Secur
    it
    iesandExchange
    Boar
    dofI
    ndi
    aandAnr
    .,2012Ci
    vi
    lAppeal
    Nos.9813And9833Of2011.

    6.Vi
    j
    aySi
    nghal
    &Or
    s.VsGov
    t.OfNctofDel
    hi&Anr
    .On22Mar
    ch2013.

    7.Zahi
    raHabi
    bul
    l
    ahShei
    kh&AnrVsSt
    ateofGuj
    arat&Or
    sAppeal
    (Cr
    l)446-
    449Of
    2004

    8.MahuaMoi
    tr
    aVer
    susUni
    onofI
    ndi
    a[Wr
    itPet
    it
    ion(
    Civ
    il
    )No.
    470Of2020]

    9.I
    n Re Cont
    agi
    on of Cov
    id 19 Vi
    rus i
    n Chi
    l
    drenPr
    otect
    ionHomes[
    Suo
    Mot
    oWr
    itPet
    it
    ion(
    Civ
    il
    )No.
    4Of2020.

    10.
    InRe:Cont
    agi
    onofCov
    id19Vi
    rusi
    nPr
    isons[
    SuoMot
    oWr
    itPet
    it
    ion(
    Civ
    il
    )No.
    1
    Of2020]

    STATUTES

    1.I
    ndi
    anPenal
    Code,
    1860

    2.CodeofCri
    minal
    Procedur
    e,1973

    3.TheConst
    it
    uti
    onofI
    ndi
    a,1950

    BOOKSANDARTI
    CLES

    1.DDBasu,‘
    Const
    it
    uti
    onal
    LawofI
    ndi
    a’7thEd.
    ( ,2003)
    2.KDGaur,‘
    I
    ndi
    anPenal
    Code1860’

    MOOTCOURTDETAI
    LS:

    1.MootCour
    tHel
    dOn:_
    _Mar
    ch2022

    2.MootCour
    tJudges:

    3.St
    udentAdv
    ocat
    efor
    :Respondent(
    Name-Ashi
    shDal
    al,
    PRN-
    ___
    ___
    _)
    Bef
    oret
    heHon’
    bleBombayHi
    ghCour
    tofI
    ndi
    a

    Mr
    .Abehal
    fofEPHP …Pet
    it
    ioner

    v
    .

    ASPAPv
    t.Lt
    d. .
    ..Respondent

    W.
    P.NO: /
    2022

    UponSubmi
    ssi
    ont
    oit
    sHon’
    bl
    eChi
    efJust
    iceandi
    ts
    Compani
    onJust
    icesofHon’
    ble

    BombayHi
    ghCour
    t

    MEMORI
    ALFORTHEPETI
    TIONER

    Counsel
    :Ashi
    shDal
    al
    STATEMENTOFJURI
    SDI
    CTI
    ON

    Thi
    sHon’
    bleBombayHi
    ghCour
    tofI
    ndi
    ahasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    oent
    ert
    ain
    t
    hepr
    esentwr
    itpet
    it
    ionunderAr
    ti
    cle226oft
    heConst
    it
    uti
    onofI
    ndi
    a,
    whi
    chr
    eadsasf
    oll
    ows:

    “
    226.PowerofHi
    ghCour
    tst
    oissuecer
    tai
    nwr
    it
    s:

    (
    1) Not
    wit
    hst
    andi
    ng any
    thi
    ng i
    n Ar
    ti
    cle 32 ev
    eryHi
    gh
    Cour
    tshal
    lhav
    epower
    s,t
    hroughoutt
    het
    err
    it
    ori
    esi
    n
    r
    elat
    iont
    owhi
    chi
    texer
    cisesj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    on,t
    oissuet
    oany
    per
    sonoraut
    hor
    it
    y,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngi
    nappr
    opr
    iat
    ecases,any
    Gov
    ernment
    ,wi
    thi
    nthoset
    err
    it
    ori
    esdi
    rect
    ions,
    order
    sor
    wr
    it
    s,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngwr
    it
    sint
    henat
    ureofhabeascor
    pus,
    mandamus,pr
    ohi
    bit
    ions,quowar
    rant
    oandcer
    ti
    orar
    i,or
    anyoft
    hem,f
    ort
    heenf
    orcementofanyoft
    her
    ight
    s
    conf
    err
    edbyPar
    tII
    Iandf
    oranyot
    herpur
    pose

    (
    2) Thepowerconf
    err
    edbycl
    ause(
    1)t
    oissuedi
    rect
    ions,
    or
    der
    sorwr
    it
    stoanyGov
    ernment
    ,aut
    hor
    it
    yorper
    son
    mayal
    so beexer
    cised byanyHi
    gh Cour
    texer
    cisi
    ng
    j
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    oni
    nrel
    ati
    ont
    othet
    err
    it
    ori
    eswi
    thi
    nwhi
    cht
    he
    causeofact
    ion,whol
    l
    yori
    npar
    t,ar
    isesf
    ort
    heexer
    cise
    ofsuchpower
    ,not
    wit
    hst
    andi
    ngt
    hatt
    heseatofsuch
    Gov
    ernmentoraut
    hor
    it
    yort
    her
    esi
    denceofsuchper
    son
    i
    snotwi
    thi
    nthoset
    err
    it
    ori
    es
    FACTUALMATRI
    X

    • I
    n2012,ASPA,aFr
    ench-
    basedpr
    ivat
    eli
    mit
    edcompany
    ,openeda
    manuf
    act
    uri
    ngf
    aci
    l
    ityont
    heout
    ski
    rt
    sofRanangaonaf
    tersecur
    ing
    al
    lnecessar
    yenv
    ironment
    alappr
    oval
    s,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngt
    heMahar
    asht
    ra
    Pol
    l
    uti
    on Cont
    rolBoar
    d'sConsentf
    orEst
    abl
    i
    shment(
    CFE)and
    Consentf
    orOper
    ati
    on(
    CFO)(
    MPCB)
    .Theper
    missi
    onswer
    eval
    i
    d
    t
    hroughJanuar
    y20,2023,wi
    tht
    hepossi
    bil
    i
    tyofamendmenti
    n
    2019. I
    n t
    he out
    ski
    rt
    s of Ranangaon, ASPA dev
    eloped a
    manuf
    act
    uri
    ngcompl
    exwor
    thRs.500cr
    ores.

    • I
    n2016,despi
    test
    epsbyt
    heMuni
    cipalCor
    por
    ati
    onofRanangaon
    t
    orest
    ri
    cti
    t,ASPA was sur
    rounded by unl
    awf
    ulbui
    l
    ding of
    r
    esi
    dent
    ialnei
    ghbor
    hoodsowi
    ngt
    othemassi
    veexpansi
    onoft
    he
    const
    ruct
    ionsect
    or.

    • Ar
    esear
    chpr
    oducedi
    n2020byt
    heCent
    ralPol
    l
    uti
    onCont
    rolBoar
    d
    ofI
    ndi
    a(CPCB)andI
    ITTanpur(
    II
    TT)i
    dent
    if
    iedRanangaonasone
    ofI
    ndi
    a'
    smostpol
    l
    utedci
    ti
    es.Asaconsequenceoft
    hisst
    udy
    ,the
    RanangaonMuni
    cipalCor
    por
    ati
    onf
    ormedt
    heRanangaonPol
    l
    uti
    on
    ManageBoar
    d(RPCB)
    ,whi
    chhast
    heaut
    hor
    it
    ytomakeanyor
    der
    s
    necessar
    ytocont
    rol
    orr
    educepol
    l
    uti
    onl
    evel
    sint
    heci
    ty.

    • Af
    terdet
    ermi
    ningASPAt
    obeoneoft
    hemostpol
    l
    uti
    ngent
    erpr
    ises
    owi
    ngt
    oit
    soper
    ati
    onsdamagi
    nggr
    oundwat
    er,t
    heRPCBi
    ssueda
    not
    icer
    equi
    ri
    ng ASPA t
    o bui
    l
    d moder
    n equi
    pmentt
    o decr
    ease
    pol
    l
    uti
    on,
    whi
    chASPAdi
    dandt
    her
    efor
    erecei
    vedt
    heCFOt
    il
    l2023.

    • OnJanuar
    y9,
    2020,
    theRPCBor
    der
    edASPAt
    oev
    acuat
    e,whi
    l
    ethe
    Mahar
    asht
    raandCent
    ralgov
    ernment
    sissuedGov
    ernmentOr
    der
    No.333pr
    ohi
    bit
    ingdi
    ff
    erenti
    ndust
    ri
    alv
    ent
    uresnearRanangaon.
    • Thepet
    it
    ioner
    ,Env
    ironmentandPubl
    i
    cHeal
    thPr
    otect
    ion(
    EPHP)
    ,a
    non-
    gov
    ernment
    alor
    gani
    zat
    ion,f
    il
    ed t
    hecur
    rentPI
    L,r
    equest
    ing
    t
    hatASPA'
    sact
    ivi
    ti
    esbehal
    ted si
    ncei
    tisi
    ncr
    easi
    ng pol
    l
    uti
    on
    l
    evel
    sinr
    esi
    dent
    ialar
    eas.RPCBwr
    otet
    otheChi
    efJust
    iceoft
    he
    BombayHi
    ghCour
    tinr
    esponset
    othepl
    ea,st
    ati
    ngt
    hatASPA'
    s
    act
    ivi
    ti
    eshav
    ebeenunconst
    it
    uti
    onalsi
    ncei
    tsr
    uli
    ngonJanuar
    y9,
    2020.

    • ASPA,t
    he r
    espondent
    s,cl
    aims t
    hati
    twas f
    ounded onl
    yaf
    ter
    obt
    aini
    ng al
    lnecessar
    yappr
    oval
    sand t
    hat
    ,asan i
    nter
    nat
    ional
    company
    ,the RPCB'
    srul
    i
    ng i
    sinv
    iol
    ati
    on of t
    he count
    ry'
    s
    i
    nter
    nat
    ional
    commi
    tment
    s.
    I
    SSUE(
    S)

     Whet
    hert
    hepet
    it
    ionf
    il
    edbyEnv
    ironmentandPubl
    i
    cHeal
    th
    Pr
    otect
    ioni
    smai
    ntai
    nabl
    e?
     Whet
    hert
    heRanangaonPol
    l
    uti
    onCont
    rol
    Boar
    d’sOr
    derdat
    ed
    09.
    01.
    2020i
    sinconf
    li
    ctwi
    thi
    nter
    nat
    ional
    obl
    i
    gat
    ions?
     Whet
    hert
    heor
    derpassedbyRPCBdat
    ed09.
    01.
    2020or
    der
    ing
    ASPAt
    oshutdownorr
    elocat
    euni
    tofASPAi
    sval
    i
    dandl
    awf
    ul?
    SUMMARYOFARGUMENTS

    I
    ssue1:WHETHERTHEPETI
    TIONFI
    LEDBYPRESI
    DENTOFENVI
    RONMENTAND
    PUBLI
    CHEALTHPROTECTI
    ONI
    SMAI
    NTAI
    NABLE.

    1.Thecounself
    ort
    hePet
    it
    ioner
    srespect
    ful
    l
    ycont
    endsbef
    oret
    hisHon'
    bl
    eHi
    gh
    Cour
    tthatt
    hepl
    eaf
    il
    edbyt
    heEnv
    ironmentandPubl
    i
    cHeal
    thPr
    otect
    ion
    underAr
    ti
    cle226oft
    heConst
    it
    uti
    onofI
    ndi
    aismai
    ntai
    nabl
    e.
    2.Thepet
    it
    ion'
    smai
    ntai
    nabi
    l
    itymaybedet
    ermi
    nedi
    noneoft
    woway
    s:[
    1.1]The
    Pr
    esi
    dentoft
    heNGOhasl
    ocusst
    andit
    ofi
    l
    ethesui
    tunderAr
    ti
    cle226,and
    [
    1.2]ASPAmaybesuedunderAr
    ti
    cle226.

    [
    1.1.
    ].THEPRESI
    DENTOFTHENGOHASLOCUSSTANDITOFI
    LETHEPETI
    TIONI
    N
    ACCORDANCEWI
    THARTI
    CLE226.

    3.I
    tisar
    guedbef
    oret
    heHon'
    bl
    eCour
    tthati
    nthecaseofSPGupt
    av.Uni
    onof
    1
    I
    ndi
    a,t
    heHon'
    bl
    eSupr
    emeCour
    thel
    dthatamemberoft
    hepubl
    i
    corasoci
    al
    act
    iongr
    oupact
    ingi
    ngoodf
    ait
    hcanseekr
    edr
    essi
    ntheHi
    ghCour
    tsf
    or
    v
    iol
    ati
    onsofl
    egalorconst
    it
    uti
    onalr
    ight
    sofper
    sonswho ar
    eunabl
    eto
    appr
    oacht
    heCour
    tduet
    osoci
    al,
    economi
    c,orot
    herdi
    sabi
    l
    iti
    es.
    4.Thel
    ocusst
    andimaybeest
    abl
    i
    shedas[
    1.1]i
    nthi
    sci
    rcumst
    ance.
    1]The
    Pr
    esi
    dentoft
    heEnv
    ironmentandPubl
    i
    cHeal
    thPr
    otect
    ionwasagenui
    ne
    f
    igur
    e,[
    1.1].
    2]Ther
    ewasabr
    eachofaper
    son'
    sconst
    it
    uti
    onal
    right
    .

    [
    1.1.
    1] THE PRESI
    DENT OF THE ENVI
    RONMENT AND PUBLI
    C HEALTH
    PROTECTI
    ONWASACTI
    NGI
    NGOODFAI
    TH.

    5.The Env
    ironmentand Publ
    i
    c Heal
    th Pr
    otect
    ion i
    s a non-
    gov
    ernment
    al
    or
    gani
    zat
    ion (
    NGO)est
    abl
    i
    shed wi
    tht
    he sol
    e pur
    pose ofpr
    otect
    ing t
    he

    1
    (
    1982)2S.
    C.R.365
    env
    ironmentandt
    heheal
    thoft
    hepeopl
    eofRanangaon,andt
    hePr
    esi
    denti
    s
    i
    tsr
    epr
    esent
    ati
    ve.
    6.Asat
    hir
    d-par
    tyi
    nthi
    sact
    ion,Env
    ironmentandPubl
    i
    cHeal
    thPr
    otect
    ioni
    s
    2
    r
    equest
    ingcour
    tint
    erv
    ent
    ionwhenanot
    herpar
    ty'
    sbasi
    cri
    ght
    sar
    einf
    ri
    nged.

    [
    1.1.
    2]THEREWASAVI
    OLATI
    ONOFAPERSON'
    SCONSTI
    TUTI
    ONALRI
    GHT.

    7.The r
    ightt
    oli
    vei
    srecogni
    zed asa basi
    cri
    ghtunderAr
    ti
    cle 21 oft
    he
    3
    const
    it
    uti
    oni
    nthecaseofSubhashKumarv
    .St
    ateofBi
    har
    ,andi
    tincl
    udes
    t
    her
    ightt
    oenj
    oypol
    l
    uti
    on-
    fr
    eewat
    erandai
    rfort
    hef
    ullenj
    oymentofl
    i
    fe.I
    f
    any
    thi
    ngendanger
    sordamagest
    hatqual
    i
    tyofl
    i
    fei
    nvi
    olat
    ionoft
    hel
    aw,a
    per
    sonhast
    her
    ightt
    oseekr
    edr
    essf
    orwat
    erorai
    rpol
    l
    uti
    ont
    hatmaybe
    har
    mful
    toqual
    i
    tyofl
    i
    fe.
    8.Asar
    esul
    t,i
    nthi
    sinst
    ance,
    ther
    epor
    tofI
    ITTanpur
    aandt
    heCent
    ralPol
    l
    uti
    on
    Cont
    rolBoar
    d ofI
    ndi
    a cl
    ear
    ly demonst
    rat
    ed t
    hatai
    r,wat
    er,and sound
    pol
    l
    uti
    onwer
    eathazar
    dousl
    evel
    sinandar
    oundRannagaon.
    9.Fur
    ther
    mor
    e,t
    he exper
    tcommi
    tt
    ee f
    ormed by t
    he Ranangaon Pol
    l
    uti
    on
    Cont
    rolBoar
    d(RPCB)sai
    dunequi
    vocal
    l
    ythatASPAwast
    obl
    ame,andt
    hati
    t
    hadal
    socont
    ami
    nat
    edt
    hedr
    inki
    ngwat
    eri
    nthear
    ea.Asar
    esul
    t,i
    twas
    det
    ermi
    nedt
    hatt
    heci
    ti
    zensofRannagaonhadv
    iol
    atedAr
    ti
    cle21.

    [
    1.2]UNDER ARTI
    CLE226OFTHECONSTI
    TUTI
    ON,A PETI
    TION CAN BEFI
    LED
    AGAI
    NSTASPA.

    10.
    Iti
    srespect
    ful
    l
    ysubmi
    tt
    edt
    otheHon'
    bl
    eCour
    tthatt
    heSupr
    emeCour
    tof
    4
    I
    ndi
    a,i
    nFeder
    alBankLt
    .v.SagarThomas&Or
    s., pr
    ovi
    dedanexcept
    ion
    st
    ati
    ngt
    hatapr
    ivat
    ebodyorper
    sonmaybesubj
    ectt
    owr
    itj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ononl
    yif
    i
    tbecomesnecessar
    yto compelsuchbodyorassoci
    ati
    ont
    o enf
    orcea
    st
    atut
    ory obl
    i
    gat
    ion or ot
    her publ
    i
    c obl
    i
    gat
    ions. Fur
    ther
    mor
    e,i
    t was
    est
    abl
    i
    shedi
    nthecaseofPeopl
    e'
    sUni
    onf
    orDemocr
    ati
    cRi
    ght
    svs.Uni
    onof

    2
    People’
    sUnionf
    orDemocr
    ati
    cRi
    ght
    sv.Uni
    onofI
    ndi
    a1982AI
    R1473
    3
    1991AIR420
    4
    (2003)10SCC733
    I
    ndi
    athatsomebasi
    cri
    ght
    sar
    eenf
    orceabl
    enotonl
    yagai
    nstt
    hest
    atebut
    al
    soagai
    nstpr
    ivat
    eper
    sons.

    Asar
    esul
    t,ev
    ent
    houghASPAi
    sapr
    ivat
    eent
    it
    y,awr
    itpet
    it
    ionmaybebr
    ought
    agai
    nsti
    tint
    hisi
    nst
    ance.
    I
    ssue2-WHETHERTHERANANGAONPOLLUTI
    ONCONTROLBOARD’
    S
    ORDER DATED 09.
    01.
    2020 I
    SIN CONFLI
    CT WI
    TH I
    NTERNATI
    ONAL
    OBLI
    GATI
    ONS?

    11.
    Iti
    srespect
    ful
    l
    yasser
    ted t
    hatt
    he Ranangaon Pol
    l
    uti
    on Cont
    rolBoar
    d's
    (
    "RPCB"
    )Or
    derdat
    ed09.
    10.
    2020i
    snoti
    nvi
    olat
    ionofanyi
    nter
    nat
    ionaldut
    ies
    ori
    nter
    nat
    ionall
    aw.Thi
    sisbecauset
    heRPCB'
    sact
    ivi
    ty,asagov
    ernment
    body
    ,comeswi
    thi
    nthest
    ateofI
    ndi
    a'
    sRi
    ghtt
    oNat
    ional
    Sov
    erei
    gnt
    yandRi
    ght
    t
    oPer
    manentSov
    erei
    gnt
    yov
    erNat
    ural
    Resour
    ces.
    12.
    Iti
    sfur
    thercl
    aimedt
    hat
    ,ont
    heot
    herhand,ASPAPv
    t.Lt
    d.v
    iol
    atedsev
    eral
    i
    nter
    nat
    ional
    env
    ironment
    alnor
    msest
    abl
    i
    shedi
    ndi
    ff
    erentagr
    eement
    s.
    13.
    Thef
    oll
    owi
    ngar
    ethet
    hreeel
    ement
    soft
    heabov
    e-ment
    ionedar
    gument
    :[2.
    1]
    Ri
    ghtt
    o Nat
    ionalSov
    erei
    gnt
    y[2.
    2]Ri
    ghtt
    o Per
    manentNat
    uralResour
    ce
    Sov
    erei
    gnt
    y[2.
    3]ASPAPv
    t.Lt
    d.hasbr
    okeni
    nter
    nat
    ional
    standar
    ds.

    [
    2.1.
    ]NATI
    ONALSOVEREI
    GNTYRI
    GHT

    14.
    Iti
    sar
    guedt
    hat
    ,si
    ncet
    heRPCBwasf
    oundedbyt
    heMuni
    cipalCor
    por
    ati
    onof
    Ranangaon,i
    tisagov
    ernment
    alent
    it
    yundert
    heI
    ndi
    anGov
    ernmentwi
    tht
    he
    samepower
    sast
    heI
    ndi
    anGov
    ernmentunderPubl
    i
    cInt
    ernat
    ional
    Law.
    15.
    Iti
    sfur
    therar
    gued t
    hatt
    he RPCB'
    s act
    ion i
    nissui
    ng t
    he or
    derdat
    ed
    09.
    01.
    2020i
    sval
    i
    dandf
    ull
    ypr
    otect
    edbyt
    heI
    ndi
    anGov
    ernment
    'sRi
    ghtt
    o
    Nat
    ionalSov
    erei
    gnt
    yunderPubl
    i
    cInt
    ernat
    ionalLaw.I
    nthecaseoft
    heI
    sland
    5
    ofPal
    mas,t
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    icesai
    dthat"
    ..
    .st
    atesov
    erei
    gnt
    yis
    def
    ined ast
    hepowerofst
    atest
    o beaut
    onomous,hav
    eaut
    onomy
    ,and
    absol
    uteaut
    hor
    it
    yov
    ert
    hei
    rint
    ernalaf
    fai
    rssubj
    ectt
    oconst
    rai
    ntsofpubl
    i
    c
    i
    nter
    nat
    ionall
    aw.
    ..
    "Ital
    sost
    atedt
    hatcoast
    alst
    ateshadj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    onov
    ert
    hei
    r
    ai
    rspace,
    ter
    ri
    tor
    ial
    sea,
    excl
    usi
    veeconomi
    czones,
    andcont
    inent
    alshel
    f.
    16.
    Oneoft
    hef
    oundat
    ionalpr
    inci
    plesoft
    heUni
    tedNat
    ionsChar
    ter
    ,ascont
    ained
    i
    nAr
    ti
    cle2oft
    heChar
    ter
    ,ist
    her
    ightt
    onat
    ional
    sov
    erei
    gnt
    y.

    5
    I
    slandofPal
    mascase,
    2RI
    AA,
    pp.829,
    838(
    1928)
    .
    [
    2.2]RI
    GHTTOPERMANENTSOVEREI
    GNTYOVERNATURALRESOURCES

    17.
    Iti
    sar
    guedt
    hatt
    heRPCB'
    sact
    ionwasl
    egi
    ti
    mat
    eandv
    ali
    dsi
    ncei
    twast
    aken
    i
    ntheexer
    ciseofi
    tsRi
    ghtt
    oPer
    manentSov
    erei
    gnt
    yov
    erNat
    uralResour
    ces.
    TheRPCBpr
    oceededt
    ocancelASPAPv
    t.Lt
    d.'
    sper
    missi
    on,ci
    ti
    ngser
    ious
    env
    ironment
    alconcer
    nsaboutt
    hecompany
    'snat
    uralr
    esour
    ces,whi
    char
    e
    undert
    heper
    manentcont
    rol
    oft
    heI
    ndi
    angov
    ernment
    .
    18.
    TheRPCB'
    sExper
    tCommi
    tt
    eesai
    dunequi
    vocal
    l
    ythatASPAPv
    t.Lt
    d.wasone
    oft
    hemostpol
    l
    uti
    ngent
    erpr
    ises,wi
    thi
    tsact
    ionscont
    ami
    nat
    ingi
    mpor
    tant
    gr
    oundwat
    err
    esour
    cesandf
    oul
    i
    ngt
    heai
    r.Asar
    esul
    t,t
    heRPCBpr
    oceededt
    o
    cancelASPA Pv
    t.Lt
    d.'
    s aut
    hor
    izat
    ion t
    o cont
    inue doi
    ng busi
    ness i
    n
    Ranangaon.
    19.
    Iti
    ssai
    dthatRanangaon'
    sval
    uabl
    egr
    oundwat
    ersuppl
    i
    esandai
    rar
    enat
    ural
    r
    esour
    ceswi
    thi
    nthesov
    erei
    gnj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    onoft
    heI
    ndi
    angov
    ernment
    ,andt
    hat
    any act
    ion t
    aken t
    o saf
    eguar
    dthem does notv
    iol
    ate any i
    nter
    nat
    ional
    r
    esponsi
    bil
    i
    ties.
    20.
    Int
    hecaseofAr
    medAct
    ivi
    ti
    esonCongo'
    sTer
    ri
    tor
    y,t
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tof
    Just
    ice has r
    ecogni
    zed t
    he r
    ightt
    o per
    manentsov
    erei
    gnt
    yov
    ernat
    ural
    r
    esour
    cesasanel
    ementofi
    nter
    nat
    ional
    cust
    omar
    ylaw.
    21.
    TheUni
    tedNat
    ionsGener
    alAssembl
    ypassedar
    esol
    uti
    onest
    abl
    i
    shi
    ngt
    he
    Decl
    arat
    iononPer
    manentSov
    erei
    gnt
    yov
    erNat
    uralResour
    ces,
    whi
    chout
    li
    ned
    di
    ff
    erentr
    ight
    sandr
    esponsi
    bil
    i
    tiesofnat
    ionsi
    nrel
    ati
    ont
    othei
    rownand
    ot
    her
    s'nat
    uralr
    esour
    ces.I
    texpr
    essl
    yst
    atest
    hataSt
    atehast
    heaut
    hor
    it
    yto
    r
    emov
    esuchpr
    oper
    tyf
    rom pr
    ivat
    eact
    orsont
    hebasi
    sofpubl
    i
    cut
    il
    it
    yand
    nat
    ional
    int
    erest
    ,not
    wit
    hst
    andi
    nganycont
    ract
    ual
    orl
    egal
    commi
    tment
    s.
    22.
    Asar
    esul
    t,t
    heRPCB'
    sact
    ioni
    nissui
    ngt
    heor
    derdat
    ed09.
    01.
    2020cancel
    i
    ng
    ASPA Pv
    t.Lt
    d.'
    saut
    hor
    izat
    iont
    ocar
    ryonbusi
    nessduet
    oenv
    ironment
    al
    concer
    nsi
    slegi
    ti
    mat
    eandv
    ali
    dunderPubl
    i
    cInt
    ernat
    ionalLaw,andi
    tdoes
    notbr
    eachanyi
    nter
    nat
    ional
    responsi
    bil
    i
    ties.

    [
    2.3.
    ]APSABREACHESI
    NTERNATI
    ONALSTANDARDS
    23.
    From 2012t
    o2020,APSAPv
    t.Lt
    d.'
    soper
    ati
    onsi
    nRanangaon,Mahar
    asht
    ra,
    r
    esul
    ted i
    n massi
    ve v
    olumes of pol
    l
    uti
    on t
    hat degr
    aded t
    he I
    ndi
    an
    env
    ironment
    .The Exper
    tCommi
    tt
    ee Repor
    toft
    he RPCB and t
    he Joi
    nt
    Resear
    chRepor
    toft
    heCent
    ralPol
    l
    uti
    onCont
    rolBoar
    dandI
    IT,Tanpurback
    upt
    hiscl
    aim.
    24.
    Iti
    scl
    aimedt
    hatASPA Pv
    t.Lt
    d.'
    sabov
    e-ment
    ionedconducti
    sinbl
    atant
    v
    iol
    ati
    on ofi
    nter
    nat
    ionalenv
    ironment
    alnor
    ms est
    abl
    i
    shed by numer
    ous
    6
    document
    s.TheUni
    tedNat
    ionsGl
    obalCompact
    ,whi
    chr
    equi
    resbusi
    nesses
    t
    otakeenv
    ironment
    alpr
    ecaut
    ions,andt
    heUni
    tedNat
    ionsGui
    dingPr
    inci
    ples
    onBusi
    nessandHumanRi
    ght
    s,whi
    chr
    equi
    rebusi
    nessest
    orespecthuman
    r
    ight
    ssuchast
    her
    ightt
    oacl
    eanandsaf
    eenv
    ironment
    ,ar
    etwoexampl
    es.

    6
    See<ht
    tps:
    //www.
    ungl
    obal
    compact
    .or
    g>accessed14Mar
    ch2022.
    I
    ssue 3:WHETHER ORDER PASSED BY RPCB DATED 09.
    01.
    20
    ORDERI
    NGASPATOSHUTDOWNORRELOCATEUNI
    TOFASPAI
    S
    VALI
    DANDLAWFUL?

    25.
    Iti
    srespect
    ful
    l
    ysubmi
    tt
    edt
    hatt
    heRanangaonPol
    l
    uti
    onGov
    ernBoar
    d(RPCB)
    i
    s a compet
    entaut
    hor
    it
    y est
    abl
    i
    shed by t
    he Muni
    cipalCor
    por
    ati
    on of
    Ranangaont
    ocont
    rolandmoni
    torpol
    l
    uti
    onl
    evel
    sint
    heci
    ty.TheRanangaon
    Muni
    cipalCor
    por
    ati
    on has gi
    ven RPCB t
    he aut
    hor
    it
    yto make anyor
    der
    necessar
    ytomanageandr
    educepol
    l
    uti
    onl
    evel
    sint
    heci
    ty.Thi
    sisl
    egi
    ti
    mat
    e
    andl
    egal
    ,asperaMahar
    asht
    raGov
    ernmentdi
    rect
    ivedat
    edMar
    ch1,2013,
    aut
    hor
    izi
    ng Muni
    cipalCounci
    l
    sto pr
    ovi
    de ConsentofEst
    abl
    i
    shmentand
    Consentt
    oOper
    ate.
    26.
    Itmayal
    sobeder
    ivedf
    rom t
    hef
    act
    sthatav
    eryaut
    hor
    it
    ati
    veandr
    eput
    abl
    e
    assessmentbyt
    heCent
    ralPol
    l
    uti
    onCont
    rolBoar
    dofI
    ndi
    aandI
    ITTanpur
    i
    dent
    if
    iedRanangaonasoneofI
    ndi
    a'
    smostpol
    l
    utedci
    ti
    es,r
    ecommendi
    ng
    t
    hatbusi
    nesses be r
    elocat
    ed out
    side ofa 6-
    kil
    omet
    err
    adi
    us.Fur
    ther
    i
    nvest
    igat
    ionbyanRPCB-
    appoi
    ntedex
    per
    tcommi
    tt
    eer
    eveal
    edt
    hatASPA
    wasoneoft
    hemostpol
    l
    uti
    ngf
    ir
    ms,
    wit
    hgr
    oundwat
    eri
    nthenei
    ghbor
    hoodof
    ASPAbei
    ngheav
    il
    ycont
    ami
    nat
    ed.
    27.
    Iti
    srespect
    ful
    l
    ysubmi
    tt
    ed t
    hat
    ,af
    tert
    hecompl
    eti
    onofappr
    opr
    iat
    edue
    di
    l
    igencepr
    iort
    otheRPCB'
    srul
    i
    ngof09.
    01.
    20,ASPAwasor
    der
    edt
    ocl
    ose
    downormov
    eint
    hepubl
    i
    cint
    erestandt
    oaddr
    esst
    hedangerofr
    isi
    ng
    pol
    l
    uti
    on l
    evel
    sint
    he hear
    tofr
    esi
    dent
    ialar
    eas.[
    3.1]Publ
    i
    c equi
    tyhas
    super
    veni
    ngaut
    hor
    it
    y,ast
    hecounsel
    woul
    dwantt
    oar
    gue.

    (
    3.1)CAN AN I
    NDUSTRYWI
    TH MASSI
    VECAPI
    TALAND REQUI
    REDPERMI
    TSBE
    ASKEDTOSHUTDOWNI
    NTHEFUTUREDUETOSUPERVENI
    NGPUBLI
    CEQUI
    TY?

    28.
    InM.
    P.Mat
    hurv
    .DTC,t
    heHon'
    bl
    eSupr
    emeCour
    tofI
    ndi
    ahel
    dthatwher
    e
    t
    her
    eisasuper
    veni
    ngpubl
    i
    cequi
    ty,t
    hegov
    ernmenti
    sal
    l
    owedt
    ochangei
    ts
    mi
    nd and hast
    hepowert
    o wi
    thdr
    aw f
    rom r
    epr
    esent
    ati
    onst
    hati
    nduced
    peopl
    etot
    akeact
    ionst
    hatmayhav
    ebeendet
    ri
    ment
    alt
    othei
    rint
    erest
    sasa
    r
    esul
    tofsuchwi
    thdr
    awal
    .Thef
    actt
    hatt
    her
    esol
    uti
    onwaspr
    ocl
    aimedf
    ora
    cer
    tai
    nti
    meper
    ioddi
    dnotpr
    ecl
    udet
    hegov
    ernmentf
    rom amendi
    ngand
    changi
    ng t
    hepol
    i
    cyatanyt
    ime.I
    fthepar
    tycl
    aimi
    ng appl
    i
    cat
    ion oft
    he
    doct
    ri
    ner
    eli
    edonanot
    ice,
    itshoul
    dhav
    ebeenawar
    ethatt
    henot
    if
    icat
    ionmay
    beal
    ter
    ed orr
    evokedatanymomenti
    ftheGov
    ernmentdeemedi
    twas
    r
    equi
    redi
    nthepubl
    i
    cint
    erest
    .
    29.
    Int
    hecaseofSt
    erl
    i
    teI
    ndust
    ri
    es(
    Indi
    a)Lt
    d.v
    .Uni
    onofI
    ndi
    a,t
    heHon'
    bl
    e
    Supr
    emeCour
    tofI
    ndi
    aexpl
    i
    cit
    lyhel
    dthati
    ftheenv
    ironmenti
    spol
    l
    utedand
    Ar
    ti
    cle21r
    ight
    sar
    ebei
    ngv
    iol
    atedaf
    teral
    lenv
    ironment
    alcl
    ear
    ances,aSt
    ate
    Pol
    l
    uti
    onCont
    rolBoar
    diswel
    lwi
    thi
    nit
    spower
    stoor
    dert
    hecl
    osur
    eofsucha
    pl
    ant
    .Thi
    sisf
    urt
    hersuppor
    ted by t
    he many deci
    sions i
    n whi
    ch our
    Const
    it
    uti
    on'
    sAr
    ti
    cle21hasdecl
    aredt
    her
    ightt
    oacl
    eanenv
    ironmentt
    obea
    f
    undament
    alr
    ight
    .
    30.
    Alt
    houghKanourwast
    hepr
    imar
    ylocat
    ionf
    ort
    anner
    iesi
    nUt
    tarPr
    adeshand
    wasoneoft
    het
    opt
    hreev
    itali
    ndust
    ri
    esi
    nthest
    ate,i
    twasdet
    ermi
    nedi
    nMc
    7
    Meht
    avsUni
    onofI
    ndi
    athatman'
    sgr
    owt
    hcannotcomeatt
    heexpenseof
    t
    heenv
    ironmentandt
    hegener
    alpubl
    i
    c'sheal
    th.I
    twasal
    sopoi
    ntedoutt
    hat
    t
    hewor
    d"env
    ironment
    "encompasseswat
    er,ai
    r,andl
    and,aswel
    last
    he
    i
    nter
    rel
    ati
    onshi
    pst
    hatoccurbet
    ween t
    heseel
    ement
    sand humans,ot
    her
    l
    i
    vingani
    mal
    s,pl
    ant
    s,mi
    croor
    gani
    sms,
    andpr
    oper
    ty.
    31.
    Iti
    sthusr
    espect
    ful
    l
    ymai
    ntai
    nedt
    hat
    ,basedont
    hepubl
    i
    c'sr
    ightt
    oacl
    ean
    env
    ironmentandgr
    eat
    erpubl
    i
    cfai
    rness,t
    heRCPBi
    sjust
    if
    iedi
    nor
    der
    ingt
    he
    cl
    osur
    eofASPA,
    regar
    dlessoft
    hepr
    oject
    'sexpensesort
    hei
    ssueofl
    i
    censes
    atanear
    li
    erst
    age.

    7
    1988AI
    R1115
    PRAYER

    Ther
    efor
    e,i
    nthel
    i
    ghtoft
    hei
    ssuesr
    aised,ar
    gument
    sadv
    ancedand
    aut
    hor
    it
    iesci
    ted,
    iti
    shumbl
    y

    pr
    ayedt
    hatt
    hisHon’
    bleCour
    tmaybepl
    easedt
    oadj
    udgeanddecl
    are:

    Thatt
    heASPAPv
    tLt
    d.hast
    oimpl
    ementt
    heor
    deri
    ssuedby
    RPCB

    AND/
    OR

    Passanyot
    heror
    der
    ,di
    rect
    ion,
    orr
    eli
    eft
    hatt
    hisHon’
    bleCour
    tmay
    deem f
    iti
    nthei
    nter
    est
    sofj
    ust
    ice,
    equi
    tyandgoodcon

    sci
    ence.

    Al
    lofwhi
    chi
    shumbl
    ypr
    ayed,
    Counsel
    fort
    hePet
    it
    ioner
    .
    I
    NTHEI
    NTERNATI
    ONALCOURTOFJUSTI
    CE

    LACOURI
    NTERNATI
    ONALEDEJUSTI
    CE

    (
    All
    egat
    ionsofGenoci
    deundert
    heConv
    ent
    ionont
    hePr
    event
    ionandPuni
    shment
    oft
    heCr
    imeofGenoci
    de)

    Ukr
    aine ……Appl
    icant

    Ver
    sus

    Russi
    anFeder
    ati
    on ….
    Respondent

    CORAM:

    DATE:MARCH_
    _,2022.
    FACTUALMATRI
    X

    Fol
    l
    owi
    ngWor
    ldWarI
    I,t
    heEur
    opeanUni
    onandt
    heUni
    tedSt
    atesofAmer
    icaf
    ormed
    t
    heNor
    thAt
    lant
    icTr
    eat
    yOr
    gani
    zat
    ion(
    NATO)
    ,ani
    nter
    gov
    ernment
    almi
    l
    itar
    yal
    l
    iance
    madeupof28Eur
    opeanandt
    woNor
    thAmer
    icannat
    ions,i
    n1949.Ukr
    ainehas
    showni
    nter
    esti
    njoi
    ningNATO onmanyoccasi
    ons,pr
    ompt
    ingRussi
    ancr
    it
    ici
    sm.
    NATO expansi
    on,accor
    dingt
    oRussi
    anPr
    esi
    dentVl
    adi
    mirPut
    in,i
    sadangert
    o
    Russi
    a,andhehasadv
    ocat
    edf
    orUkr
    aine'
    sexcl
    usi
    onf
    rom t
    hemi
    l
    itar
    yal
    l
    iance.
    Russi
    aissai
    dtohav
    esent14mi
    l
    itar
    yuni
    tst
    otheUkr
    aine-
    Russi
    abor
    der
    ,oneoft
    he
    bi
    ggestunannouncedmov
    essi
    nceRussi
    ansol
    dier
    sent
    eredCr
    imea.I
    nli
    ghtoft
    he
    danger
    ,Ukr
    aine'
    spr
    esi
    denthasasked Pr
    esi
    dentObama t
    o expedi
    tet
    heNATO
    r
    ati
    fi
    cat
    ionpr
    ocedur
    e.Russi
    aal
    l
    egedl
    yinv
    adedUkr
    aine'
    sbor
    der
    sinFebr
    uar
    y2022i
    n
    sel
    f-
    def
    enseunderAr
    ti
    cle51oft
    heUNChar
    ter
    ,andt
    hePer
    manentRepr
    esent
    ati
    ve
    oft
    heRussi
    anFeder
    ati
    ont
    otheUNsental
    ett
    ert
    otheUNSecr
    etar
    y-Gener
    aland
    Secur
    it
    yCounci
    lonFebr
    uar
    y24,2022,i
    nfor
    mingt
    hem oft
    hemi
    l
    itar
    yoper
    ati
    on.
    Fol
    l
    owi
    ngt
    hat
    ,Ukr
    aine'
    sPr
    esi
    dent
    ,Mr
    .Zel
    ensky
    ,appeal
    edf
    orhel
    pfr
    om NATO,
    Amer
    ica,and I
    ndi
    a.Howev
    er,because t
    othe possi
    bil
    i
    ty ofWor
    ld WarI
    II
    ,no
    meani
    ngf
    ulhel
    pwassuppl
    i
    edbyanycount
    ry.Asar
    esul
    t,Ukr
    ainef
    il
    edacompl
    aint
    wi
    tht
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    iceagai
    nstRussi
    a,r
    equest
    ingt
    hatRussi
    abehel
    d
    r
    esponsi
    blef
    ori
    tsact
    sagai
    nstUkr
    aine.Ukr
    aineal
    l
    egedRussi
    awasr
    esponsi
    blef
    or
    "
    mani
    pul
    ati
    ngt
    heconceptofgenoci
    det
    ojust
    if
    yat
    tack.
    "Ukr
    ainehaspr
    essedf
    oran
    ear
    lydeci
    sionor
    der
    ingRussi
    atost
    opi
    tsmi
    l
    itar
    yact
    ivi
    ti
    es.Humani
    tar
    iancor
    ri
    dor
    s
    wer
    ebui
    l
    t,andt
    hepr
    esi
    denti
    ssuedceasef
    ir
    einst
    ruct
    ionst
    otheRussi
    anmi
    l
    itar
    y.
    STATEMENTOFJURI
    SDI
    CTI
    ON

    Ar
    ti
    cle36oft
    heSt
    atut
    eoft
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    ice

    1.Thejur
    isdi
    cti
    onoftheCourtcompr
    isesal
    lcaseswhi
    chthepar
    ti
    esref
    ertoitand
    al
    lmattersspeci
    all
    yprov
    idedfori
    ntheChart
    eroftheUni
    tedNat
    ionsorint
    reati
    es
    andconventi
    onsinfor
    ce.

    2.Thest atespart
    iestot hepresentStat
    utemayatanyt i
    medeclaret hatt hey
    recogni
    zeascompul sor
    yipsof
    actoandwi t
    houtspecialagreement,
    inrel
    ati
    ont oany
    otherstat
    eaccepti
    ngt hesameobl i
    gat
    ion,thejur
    isdict
    ionoft heCourti
    nal llegal
    disput
    esconcer
    ning:

    a.thei
    nter pret
    ati
    onofat reat
    y;
    b.anyquest ionofint
    ernati
    onallaw;
    c.theexistenceofanyf actwhich,i
    fest
    abli
    shed,woul
    dconst
    it
    uteabreachofan
    i
    nternationalobl
    igat
    ion;
    d.thenat ureorext entoft her epar
    ati
    ont o bemadef orthebreachofan
    i
    nternationalobl
    igat
    ion.

    3.Thedeclarat
    ionsr
    eferredtoabovemaybemadeuncondit
    ional
    lyoroncondi
    ti
    on
    ofreci
    proci
    tyonthepartofsever
    alorcer
    tai
    nst
    ates,
    orf
    oracert
    ainti
    me.

    4.Suchdeclar
    ati
    onsshallbedeposi
    tedwit
    htheSecret
    ary
    -Gener
    aloftheUni
    ted
    Nati
    ons,whoshallt
    ransmitcopi
    est
    hereoft
    othepar
    ti
    estot heSt
    atut
    eandtothe
    Regi
    str
    aroft
    heCourt.

    5.Decl arat
    ionsmadeunderAr t
    icl
    e36oft heStatuteoft hePermanentCourtof
    Int
    ernationalJusticeandwhi charest
    il
    linforceshallbedeemed,asbet weenthe
    part
    iest othepr esentStat
    ute,tobeaccept
    ancesoft hecompul sor
    yjuri
    sdi
    cti
    onof
    theInternati
    onalCour tofJusti
    cefort
    heper i
    odwhi chtheysti
    l
    lhav etorunandin
    accordancewi t
    ht heirt
    erms.

    6.I
    ntheeventofadi
    sputeastowhethert
    heCour
    thasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    on,t
    hemat
    tershal
    l
    beset
    tl
    edbythedeci
    sionoft
    heCourt
    .
    I
    SSUESRAI
    SED

    1.Whet
    herornott
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ional
    Cour
    tofJust
    icehasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    oheart
    his
    pr
    esentmat
    ter
    ?

    2.Whet
    herornotRussi
    aisj
    ust
    if
    iedi
    ntaki
    ngmi
    li
    tar
    yact
    ionagai
    nstUkr
    aineor
    not
    ?

    3.Whet
    herornotRussi
    ahascommi
    tt
    edt
    heactofgenoci
    dei
    nUkr
    aine?
    SUMMARYOFARGUMENTS

    I
    ssueI WhetherornottheI
    nternat
    ional
    Cour
    tofJust
    icehasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    o
    heart
    hispresentmatt
    er?
    I
    tisr
    espect
    ful
    l
    ycont
    endedt
    hatt
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ional
    Cour
    tofJust
    icel
    acksj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    oni
    n
    t
    hismat
    terowi
    ngt
    oal
    ackofaut
    hor
    it
    yundert
    heConv
    ent
    ionont
    hePr
    event
    ionand
    Puni
    shmentofGenoci
    de t
    o hearUkr
    aine'
    s cl
    aims ofgenoci
    de.To begi
    n,t
    he
    Ukr
    aini
    angov
    ernmentaskst
    heCour
    ttoconsi
    dert
    hel
    egal
    i
    tyofRussi
    a'
    suseoff
    orce
    i
    nUkr
    aineundert
    he1948Conv
    ent
    ionont
    hePr
    event
    ionandPuni
    shmentoft
    he
    Cr
    imeofGenoci
    de(
    hencef
    ort
    href
    err
    edt
    oast
    he"
    Genoci
    deConv
    ent
    ion"
    ).I
    tal
    so
    br
    ingsupt
    hesubj
    ectofRussi
    a'
    srecogni
    ti
    onoft
    hePeopl
    es'Republ
    i
    csofDonet
    sk
    andLuhanskundert
    heGenoci
    deConv
    ent
    ion.TheDi
    sput
    eResol
    uti
    onCl
    ausei
    s
    ment
    ionedi
    nthi
    sConv
    ent
    ion'
    sAr
    ti
    cleI
    X,andi
    tsmai
    nobj
    ect
    ivei
    sto"
    prev
    entand
    puni
    sh"genoci
    deandot
    hercr
    imes.Ukr
    ainej
    ustwant
    saswi
    ftr
    esol
    uti
    onor
    der
    ing
    Russi
    atoceasei
    tsmi
    l
    itar
    yexer
    cises.I
    t'
    svi
    talt
    onot
    ethatt
    hisi
    saone-
    ti
    me,al
    l
    -
    pur
    posemeasur
    e.TheConv
    ent
    ion'
    ssect
    ionondi
    sput
    eset
    tl
    ementi
    snotawi
    de
    f
    ramewor
    kforconf
    li
    ctr
    esol
    uti
    on.Ev
    eni
    fint
    eri
    m saf
    eguar
    dsar
    einpl
    ace,t
    heCour
    t
    mustf
    ir
    stest
    abl
    i
    shwhet
    heri
    thasj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    on."
    Oneoft
    hebasi
    cel
    ement
    sofi
    ts
    St
    atut
    eist
    hati
    tcannotset
    tl
    eadi
    sput
    ebet
    weenSt
    ateswi
    thoutt
    heassentoft
    hose
    1
    St
    ates t
    oit
    sjur
    isdi
    cti
    on,
    "the Cour
    t decl
    ared i
    n Por
    tugalv
    ersus Aust
    ral
    i
    a.
    Fur
    ther
    mor
    e,t
    heI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    icehasof
    tensai
    dthati
    tlackspower
    whenamemberst
    ater
    efusest
    osubmi
    ttot
    heCour
    t'
    sjur
    isdi
    cti
    on.
    2
    I
    nthecaseofYugosl
    avi
    av.I
    tal
    y, t
    heCour
    twentont
    oar
    guet
    hatt
    heCour
    tcannot
    mer
    elynot
    icet
    hatonepar
    tybel
    i
    evest
    heGenoci
    deConv
    ent
    ionappl
    i
    eswhi
    l
    ethe
    ot
    herdoesnotwhenconsi
    der
    ingwhet
    heraconf
    li
    ctar
    isesunderAr
    ti
    cleI
    Xoft
    he
    Genoci
    deConv
    ent
    ion.Thepl
    ainwor
    dingoft
    heConv
    ent
    ionmakesi
    tcl
    eart
    hati
    thas
    noaut
    hor
    it
    yov
    ert
    heuseoff
    orcebet
    weenst
    ates.

    Asaconsequence,t
    heRespondent
    srespect
    ful
    l
    ysubmi
    ttot
    hisHon'
    bl
    eCour
    tthati
    t
    l
    acksj
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    oheart
    hepr
    esentmat
    tersi
    nceRussi
    ahasr
    efusedt
    oacceptt
    he
    Hon'
    bl
    eCour
    t'
    sjur
    isdi
    cti
    onandbecauseAr
    ti
    cleI
    Xoft
    heGenoci
    deConv
    ent
    iondoes
    notappl
    ytot
    hecur
    rentci
    rcumst
    ances.

    1
    EastTi
    mor(Port
    ugal
    v.Austral
    i
    a),
    Judgment
    ,I.
    C.JRepor
    ts1995,p.90,par
    a.26.
    2
    Yugosl
    avi
    av.It
    aly
    ,Pr
    ovi
    sionalMeasur
    es,
    Orderof2June1999,J.
    C.J.Report
    s1999,
    p.481,
    par
    a.25.
    I
    ssueI
    I WhetherornotRussi
    aisj
    ust
    if
    iedi
    ntaki
    ngmi
    li
    tar
    yact
    ionagai
    nst
    Ukr
    aineornot?
    I
    nthi
    sinst
    ance,t
    he Respondent r
    espect
    ful
    l
    y ar
    gues t
    hat Russi
    a'
    s mi
    l
    itar
    y
    i
    nter
    vent
    ionagai
    nstUkr
    ainei
    sjust
    if
    iabl
    e.Thi
    sisbecauseRussi
    a'
    sspeci
    almi
    l
    itar
    y
    oper
    ati
    on i
    n Ukr
    ainei
    sbased on Ar
    ti
    cle51 oft
    heUN Char
    terand cust
    omar
    y
    i
    nter
    nat
    ionall
    aw,bot
    hofwhi
    chguar
    ant
    eet
    her
    ightt
    osel
    f-
    def
    ence.Thev
    erbat
    imi
    s
    gi
    venasf
    oll
    ows,

    Ar
    ti
    cle51.Not
    hingi
    nthepr
    esentChar
    tershal
    li
    mpai
    rthei
    nher
    entr
    ightof
    i
    ndi
    vi
    dualorcol
    l
    ect
    ivesel
    f-
    def
    encei
    fanar
    medat
    tackoccur
    sagai
    nsta
    Memberoft
    heUni
    tedNat
    ions,
    unt
    ilt
    heSecur
    it
    yCounci
    lhast
    akenmeasur
    es
    necessar
    ytomai
    ntai
    nint
    ernat
    ionalpeaceandsecur
    it
    y.

    Thebl
    oodyconf
    li
    cti
    nEast
    ernUkr
    aine,whi
    chst
    art
    edi
    n2014andhascl
    aimedt
    he
    l
    i
    vesofdozensofpeopl
    e,i
    swel
    l
    -known.Becauseoft
    hewari
    nDonbas,
    theUkr
    aini
    an
    gov
    ernmentandt
    her
    ebelr
    epubl
    i
    csofDonet
    skandLuhansk,whi
    char
    epar
    tof
    Donbas,ar
    ebat
    tl
    ing f
    orcont
    rol
    .Thebat
    tl
    eended i
    n 2014-
    2015,wi
    tht
    hesel
    f-
    pr
    ocl
    aimed Donet
    sk and Luhansk Peopl
    e'
    s Republ
    i
    cs hol
    ding one-
    thi
    rd oft
    he
    r
    egi
    on'
    slandar
    ea,i
    ncl
    udi
    ngt
    hemostdensel
    ypopul
    atedar
    eas.Thesear
    eashav
    e
    beenof
    fi
    cial
    l
    yrecogni
    zedbyRussi
    a.Asaconsequence,Russi
    awasf
    orcedt
    otake
    t
    hedanger
    ousdeci
    sionofi
    nter
    fer
    ingmi
    l
    itar
    il
    yinUkr
    ainewhent
    hePeopl
    e'
    sRepubl
    i
    c
    ofDonbassoughtai
    d.OnFebr
    uar
    y24,2022,t
    hePer
    manentRepr
    esent
    ati
    veoft
    he
    Russi
    anFeder
    ati
    ont
    otheUni
    tedNat
    ionscommuni
    cat
    edt
    hel
    egalbasi
    sfort
    he
    mi
    l
    itar
    yoper
    ati
    ont
    otheSecr
    etar
    y-Gener
    aloft
    heUni
    tedNat
    ionsandt
    heUni
    ted
    Nat
    ionsSecur
    it
    yCounci
    lint
    hef
    orm ofanot
    if
    icat
    ionunderAr
    ti
    cle51oft
    heUni
    ted
    Nat
    ionsChar
    ter
    .Ther
    elev
    antl
    ett
    er,addr
    essedt
    otheUNSecr
    etar
    y-Gener
    alwi
    tht
    he
    r
    equestt
    hati
    tbeci
    rcul
    atedasaUNSecur
    it
    yCounci
    ldocument
    ,for
    war
    dedt
    otheUN
    Secr
    etar
    y-Gener
    al"
    the addr
    essoft
    he Pr
    esi
    dentoft
    he Russi
    an Feder
    ati
    on Mr
    .
    Vl
    adi
    mirPut
    int
    otheci
    ti
    zensofRussi
    ainf
    ormi
    ngt
    hem oft
    hemeasur
    est
    akeni
    n
    accor
    dancewi
    thAr
    ti
    cle51oft
    heUNChar
    teri
    nexer
    ciseoft
    her
    ightofsel
    f-
    def
    ense.
    "
    Fi
    nal
    l
    y,t
    he Respondentr
    espect
    ful
    l
    y submi
    tst
    hatRussi
    a'
    s mi
    l
    itar
    y act
    ivi
    tyi
    s
    aut
    hor
    isedunderAr
    ti
    cle51oft
    heUni
    tedNat
    ionsChar
    ter
    .

    I
    ssue3 Whet
    herornotRussi
    ahascommi
    tt
    edt
    heactofgenoci
    dei
    nUkr
    aine?
    Russi
    ahasnotcommi
    tt
    edgenoci
    dei
    nUkr
    aine,
    theRespondentr
    espect
    ful
    l
    ysubmi
    ts
    t
    otheHon'
    bl
    eInt
    ernat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    ice.I
    nAr
    ti
    cleI
    Ioft
    heGenoci
    deConv
    ent
    ion,
    t
    het
    erm"
    genoci
    de"i
    sdef
    ined.I
    tgoesont
    osayt
    hatgenoci
    dei
    sdef
    inedast
    he
    pr
    emedi
    tat
    edmur
    derofmember
    sofagr
    oup,i
    nfl
    i
    cti
    ngser
    iousbodi
    l
    yorment
    al
    damaget
    omember
    soft
    hegr
    oup,
    andi
    mposi
    ngcondi
    ti
    onsofl
    i
    feont
    hegr
    oupwi
    th
    t
    hei
    ntentofcausi
    ngi
    tsphy
    sicalext
    inct
    ioni
    nwhol
    eori
    npar
    t.Accor
    dingt
    othi
    s
    Ar
    ti
    cle,
    thesecr
    imesmustbecommi
    tt
    edwi
    tht
    hei
    ntentt
    odest
    royanat
    ional
    ,et
    hni
    c,
    r
    aci
    al,
    orr
    eli
    giousgr
    oupi
    nwhol
    eori
    npar
    t.I
    nthi
    scase,
    Russi
    ahasnotdoneanyof
    t
    heaf
    orement
    ionedt
    hings,opt
    ingi
    nst
    eadt
    oacti
    nsel
    f-
    def
    ence,
    asper
    mit
    tedbyUN
    Char
    terAr
    ti
    cle51.Russi
    awasonl
    ydef
    endi
    ngt
    heDonbassar
    easand,
    mor
    ecr
    uci
    all
    y,
    def
    endi
    ngi
    tsel
    fagai
    nstNATO expansi
    on,whi
    chi
    sadangert
    oRussi
    a.NATO'
    s
    east
    war
    dexpansi
    on,
    whi
    chi
    sput
    ti
    ngi
    tsmi
    l
    itar
    ybasescl
    osert
    otheRussi
    anbor
    der
    ,
    i
    sanot
    hersour
    ceofanxi
    etyf
    orRussi
    a.I
    fonesi
    deser
    iousl
    yvi
    olat
    esaceasef
    ir
    e
    agr
    eement
    ,theot
    herpar
    tyhast
    heaut
    hor
    it
    ytor
    est
    artcombati
    fitso want
    s,
    accor
    ding t
    othe Mi
    nsk I
    Iagr
    eement
    ,whi
    ch was nev
    er i
    mpl
    ement
    ed.The
    enl
    argementofNATOi
    sat
    hreatt
    oRussi
    aowi
    ngt
    oAr
    ti
    cle53 oft
    heNor
    thAt
    lant
    ic
    Tr
    eat
    y.Thepr
    ovi
    sionf
    orcol
    l
    ect
    ivedef
    ensei
    slai
    dfor
    thi
    nthi
    sar
    ti
    cle.I
    naddi
    ti
    on,
    Russi
    adi
    dnotcommi
    tgenoci
    desi
    ncei
    tbui
    l
    thumani
    tar
    iancor
    ri
    dor
    sinanumberof
    l
    ocat
    ionst
    hroughoutUkr
    aine.I
    fRussi
    awant
    edt
    oper
    pet
    rat
    egenoci
    de,i
    twoul
    dnot
    hav
    epr
    ovi
    dedhumani
    tar
    iancor
    ri
    dor
    sforUkr
    aini
    anpeopl
    e.Asaconsequence,i
    tis
    r
    espect
    ful
    l
    ycl
    aimedt
    hatRussi
    adi
    dnotpl
    ant
    ocommi
    tgenoci
    dei
    nUkr
    aineanddi
    d
    notdo so.I
    nvi
    ew oft
    he abov
    e,t
    he gov
    ernmentoft
    he Russi
    an Feder
    ati
    on
    r
    espect
    ful
    l
    yrequest
    sthatt
    heCour
    tabst
    ainf
    rom i
    mpl
    ement
    ingpr
    ovi
    sionalr
    emedi
    es
    anddi
    smi
    sst
    hecasef
    rom i
    tsdocket
    .

    3
    Ar
    ti
    cl
    e5,
    Nor
    thAt
    lant
    icTr
    eat
    y.
    PRAYER

    Wher
    efor
    e,i
    nli
    ghtoft
    hei
    ssuesr
    aised,summar
    yofar
    gument
    sadv
    anced,and
    aut
    hor
    it
    iesci
    ted,
    mayt
    hisHon’
    bleCour
    tbepl
    easedt
    odecl
    are/
    adj
    udge/
    hol
    dthat
    :

    a)Decl
    aret
    hatt
    heHon’
    bleI
    nter
    nat
    ionalCour
    tofJust
    icedoesnothav
    e
    j
    uri
    sdi
    cti
    ont
    otr
    ythi
    smat
    ter
    .

    b)I
    nst
    ructUkr
    ainet
    ost
    opat
    roci
    ti
    eswi
    thr
    efer
    encet
    oDonet
    skandLuhansk
    r
    egi
    onwi
    thi
    mmedi
    ateef
    fect
    .

    c)Decl
    aret
    hatRussi
    adi
    dnotcommi
    ttheactofgenoci
    deandmer
    elyact
    edi
    n
    sel
    f-
    def
    enseasperAr
    ti
    cle51oft
    heUNChar
    ter
    .

    AND/
    OR

    Passanyot
    heror
    der
    ,di
    rect
    ion,
    rel
    ieft
    hati
    tmaydeem f
    iti
    nthebesti
    nter
    est
    sof
    Just
    ice,
    Fai
    rnessandGoodConsci
    ence.

    Fort
    hisactofki
    ndness,
    theRespondentshal
    ldut
    yboundf
    oreverpr
    ay.

    Sd/
    -(Counsel
    forRespondent
    )
    OBSERVATION OF CIVIL CASE PROCEEDINGS

    TITLE OF THE CASE

    Following three suits were heard together:

    Narayana v. Sri Chaitanya (OS 51/18)


    Clubbed with

    Sri Chaitanya v. Narayana (OS 576/19)


    Clubbed with

    Narayana v. Sri Chaitanya (OS 343/21)

    PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT


    The Petitioner as per the last suit (OS 343/21) is Narayana Group, an educational conglomerate
    imparting educational services in the area of preparation for competitive entrance exams like IIT-
    JEE, NEET etc. The coaching institute has a very large presence in the State of Telangana and Andhra
    Pradesh with a large number of branches in both the states, and have recently expanded to six more
    states in India.

    PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENT


    The Respondent as per the last suit (OS 343/21) is the Sri Chaitanya Educational Institutions,
    is another such educational group running junior colleges since 1986 in Andhra Pradesh.
    Subsequently, it opened specialized coaching centers in different states starting from Andhra Pradesh
    and present day Telangana for training students for IIT-JEE, NEET and PMT competitive exams.

    ADVOCATE OF THE COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT


    Advocate Uma Shankar Singh

    ADVOCATE OF THE RESPONDENT


    Advocate Harish K Reddy

    IN THE COURT OF

    27 | P a g e
    Civil Court at Hyderabad.

    CONTENTS OF THE COMPLAINT/APPEAL IN BRIEF


    a. In the year 2012, both the petitioner and respondent came together to set up a common society
    called ‘CHINA’, which would be a chain of elite colleges in few states. The 1st MoU (on 21st July,
    2012) was signed in this regard where both agreed to contribute 50% to the finances of the society
    and the constitution of Managing Committee containing equal number of Directorsof both parties.
    The first batch under CHINA began in June 2013 which had a total strength of120, divided into 60-
    60 top performing students from both Narayana and Sri Chaitanya colleges. A 2nd MoU was further
    signed in 2014 when parties felt they were losing brand valuebecause of limited batch, so introduced
    a new batch which allowed direct admission for few seats. This 2nd MoU also addressed concerns of
    permanent staff to be employed and agreed onnew advertising names- CHINA Chaitanya Narayana
    Group of colleges (for Medical Entrances) and CHINA Narayana Chaitanya Group of Colleges (for
    Engineering Entrances).

    b. The dispute arose first in 2017-18 when the then batch of Sri Chaitanya Group separately got
    better ranks amongst its students than the ones under CHINA batch. Narayana filed the first suit (OS
    – 51/18) claiming that Sri Chaitanya was violating the terms of MoU to send its best students to
    CHINA and affecting CHINA’s brand name as a result. Petitioners sought interim prayer that CHINA
    should be allowed to advertise the names of these students of Sri Chaitanyawho got better ranks under
    its name for 2018 and also prayed at in future is any student gets better rank from standalone
    institutions, their names to be advertised under CHINA’s name. The trial began and evidence was
    produced.

    c. Meanwhile in 2019, Narayana started advertising without permission on behalf of CHINA, the
    names of Sri Chaitanya’s students. The Sri Chaitanya Group filed the second suit (OS-576/19) for an
    injunction to stop the use of its students’ name under CHINA’s name. An injunction order was granted
    by the Court in favour of Sri Chaitanya Group.

    d. The Sri Chaitanya group made its intention to not continue with the contract and conveyed the
    same in a meeting with Narayana in March 2019. As the former claims, it was oral terminationof
    contract on their end. However, Narayana under CHINA still sent out invitations and advertised for
    students to join for the upcoming batch of 2019-20. Seeing this, a termination notice in writing was
    sent for the same on 24th May 2019 to the effect of oral communication made earlier.

    28 | P a g e
    The Narayana Group filed a mandatory injunction suit in the Court for MoUs to continue for this
    academic year as the termination came in May after the admission season in April. They stated that
    the new batch had already begun, Sri Chaitanya was obligated to contribute its shareof expenses for
    the same under the MoU and it could only be terminated from next year batch now. The court granted
    temporary relief to Narayana by ordering mandatory payment by Sri Chaitanya under the MoU for
    2019-20 academic year.

    The Court had to hear on the following issues in the proceedings now:
    i. Whether Narayana is entitled to advertise Chaitanya’s students’ name under the CHINA group.
    ii. Whether the termination by Sri Chaitanya Group was within time limit for the academic year
    of 2019-20 i.e. whether it is valid or not.

    The hearing was scheduled on 10th April, 2022, the proceedings of which are to be observed and
    recorded by the student.

    OBSERVATION OF THE TRIAL IN BRIEF


    At the hearing, three suits were heard together, however the Civil Court restricted the hearing to
    limited point of consideration – whether oral termination is valid or not and the written termination
    sent later by Respondent was only ratification of the oral termination?

    The submissions on part of the petitioner i.e. Narayana Group were as follows:
    i. Oral termination of a written contract is not a regular occurrence in law and is only valid in
    exceptional circumstances.

    ii. Even if an oral termination happened, there is no evidence with regards to such oral termination
    and that makes the claim of Respondent in itself very suspicious. The written letter came one month
    later in May 2019 and a gap of one month is too late if oral talks happened in March 2019.

    iii. A termination leads to commercial consequences, it will also lead to termination of the society
    CHINA and there are a lot of things to be settled in that regard under the MoU.

    iv. Also there is no scope of oral termination between two companies when explicit authorization
    is needed from the respective authorities of those companies.

    The respondents’ Adv. Joshi rebutted the submissions above on behalf of Sri Chaitanya Group as
    follows:

    29 | P a g e
    For the first ground, the petitioners have given no concrete argument wherein they say that no
    oral termination of contract is permitted at all in law.
    On the second ground, Respondents submit that there is nothing in the Indian Contract Act, 1872
    which states that a written contract has to be rescinded in writing only. Also, the SupremeCourt has
    earlier held that “Oral termination of written contract is very much valid”.

    i. On the third ground, the contention of the Respondent’s is that consequential relief has to be
    worked out on termination, however that doesn’t take away Respondent’s right to terminate the
    contract. It does not disentitle the party to terminate. Termination precede the consequentialacts and
    the rights of parties are therefore unaffected by the consequences.

    The minutes of the meeting that happened in March 2019 were recorded and signed by both parties
    were produced as evidence in the case.

    ii. On the last ground, the Respondent contended that the authorized people under the MoU for both
    parties can terminated the agreement and these authorized people from Chaitanya’s end only
    terminated orally in March 2019 and such termination is very much possible. At the endof the day,
    under Indian Contract Act, the communication of termination matters, and the formis not specified.

    ORDER OF THE COURT


    The Court passed an order which upheld the termination for time being until the trial ends.
    Court also directed that both the parties cannot use each other’s student’s names, or anything related
    for advertising for time being. The trial will begin and scheduled date for the same willbe out soon.

    COMMENTS ON THE TRIAL


    The present case dealt with one of the most basic part of the Contract law, rescinding a contract
    and the validity of the oral form of termination. The recent order passed by the Court favors the
    Respondent and indicates the inclination of the Court to hold that such oral termination is not straight
    up denied in law and there is scope to judge on basis of evidence that will be produced in the trial to
    weigh the facts and law and decide in favor of any one party. The case becomes more important to
    be adjudged as fast as possible because so many students enroll.

    (Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate)

    30 | P a g e
    OBSERVATION OF CRIMINAL CASE PROCEEDINGS

    TITLE OF THE CASE

    X V. State of Telangana

    PARTICULARS OF THE COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

    Accused or X (who shall remain unnamed for the sake of confidentiality) was a minister in the
    erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh, now split into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, from 2003 until
    2010. At the time, he managed a portfolio that was concerned with matters such as industrial
    development which entailed the granting of a number of permission with respect to civil lines and
    infrastructure. He remains a politician in Telangana at present.

    PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENT

    State of Telangana

    ADVOCATE OF THE COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

    Advocate Uma Shankar Singh

    ADVOCATE OF THE RESPONDENT

    State Public Prosecutor

    IN THE COURT OF

    Telangana High Court at Hyderabad, Special Court for Trial of Criminal Cases against
    Legislators (MLAs, MLCs and MPs) at Hyderabad

    CONTENTS OF THE COMPLAINT/APPEAL IN BRIEF

    The claim made by the State of Telangana is that X owned an expanse of land in his native village and
    Hyderabad (collectively 80 acres) and would sell these lands to companies or private parties who
    approached him for licenses, permissions or government contracts at exorbitant rates (60 lakhs per acre
    in a village) in lieu of a direct bribe. The proceeds were then re-invested by X in more cheap lands
    which would in turn be purchased by parties seeking his favor for higher rates, and so on. The first
    transaction is claimed to have taken place in 2005, whereby 3 benefactors in exchange for receiving
    certain government contracts and concessions purchased the aforementioned 80 acres of land at an
    exorbitant rate from X. In turn, X re-invested such proceeds into another 120 acres of land which was
    in turn at even higher price in order to purchase 50 acres of land in Hyderabad in 2008.

    31 | P a g e
    One of the aforementioned purchasers of the land then filed a case against X under Sections
    405, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) of criminal breach of trust and cheating
    respectively. The CBI on investigation of the claim further filed charges under Sections 13 of the
    Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (“PC Act”) for engaging in the very transaction of selling of land
    in exchange of favor, or criminal misconduct by a public servant. Further, charges have been brought
    against X under the Prevention of Money Laundering, 2002 (“PMLA”) by the Enforcement Directorate
    (“ED”) attaching the aforementioned 50 acres and stating that it has been purchased by X using
    proceeds of the crime under the IPC and PC Acts. At this time, there are two trials in progress against
    X namely –

    i. Trial under IPC, PC Act

    ii. Trial under PMLA, 2002

    The advocate for the accused X, Adv. Joshi moved a discharge application under Section 245
    of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1974 (“CrPC”) to the effect that from the available charge sheet, no
    commission of an offense can be discerned and hence, no framing of charges by the Court against X
    is required in response to the charges under the IPC, PC Act.

    Simultaneously, Adv. Joshi also moved a second application in the PMLA trial stating that
    unless X is convicted of the crimes charged under the IPC and PC Act (crime), he cannot be convicted
    under PMLA of possessing the proceeds of such aforementioned crime.

    The offences under PMLA are not standalone, but rather predicate offences depending on the
    Court’s determination of guilt or innocence of X of the corresponding offences under the IPC or PC
    Act. The advocate contended that the PMLA proceedings cannot proceed unless and until there is a
    conclusion to the trial of X under the IPC, PC Act under Section 482 of the CrPC.

    This second application will be the subject of the hearing on 9 th April, 2021, the
    proceedings of which are to be observed and recorded by the student

    32 | P a g e
    OBSERVATION OF THE TRIAL IN BRIEF

    At the hearing for the second discharge application - with respect to staying the proceeding of
    predicated offences under the PMLA until the conclusion of the IPC trail determining the X’s guilt or
    innocence in the corresponding charges - the CBI Court rejected this contention. The CBI Court held
    that the proceedings under PMLA may not only continue but also that is can even precede the
    conclusion of the trial of X of the offences under IPC and PC Act. This order came to be challenged at
    present.

    On Friday, 9th April, 2021 at the Telengana High Court at the Special Court for Trial of Criminal
    Cases against Legislators (MLAs, MLCs and MPs), the Court heard the arguments of the advocate for
    X (now Appellant, due to the challenging of the above mentioned CBI Court order) between 3:50pm
    and 4:30pm. The submissions of the advocate were simple and threefold namely –

    a. Absurdity

    The advocate argued that if the 50 acres owned by X is attached and taken over as a proceed of crime,
    but later he is acquitted of the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust under IPC as well as
    offences under the PC Act, then how can the aforementioned 50 acres still be a proceed of crime when
    no crime has been committed by X as per the latter trial? This in turn leads to a circumstance of
    absurdity. In this submission, the case of Binod Kumar Sinha V. State of Jharkhand [W. P. (Cr.) No.
    257 of 2012] was relied upon where the Jharkand High Court quashed charges against of cheating
    under IPC against the complainant and further held that as the charges of a scheduled offence, i.e.
    crime were quashed, proceedings under the PMLA for possession of proceeds of crime must be
    quashed as well as no crime has been committed by the complainant. Further, in the case of Arun
    Kumar Mishra V. Enforcement Directorate [CRL MC 5508/2014], where the Delhi High Court held
    that only when the commission of a crime has been established can adjudicated relating to possession
    of proceeds of crime commence.

    b. Comparison to the Offence of Harbouring

    Drawing a parallel between the present fact situation and the crime of harbouring under Section 212
    of IPC (whoever harbours or conceals a person whom he knows an offender, with the intention of
    screening him from legal punishment). Avd. Joshi argued that if X if charged with murder and Y is
    charged with harbouring X (a murderer) and it is found by trial that X is innocent of the charge, then
    how can Y remain guilt of harboruing an offender when X is

    33 | P a g e
    proven not to be an offender? This contention was supported by the judgments of various courts who
    have categorically held that unless the offender has been convicted, the person who has been accused
    of harbouring the offender cannot be convicted such as – Ram Raj Chaudhury V. Emperor [AIR 33
    (1946) Patna 74], Kuriakose Chacko V. State of Kerala [1951 (52) Cri LJ 470] and Aleem V. State of
    Andhra Pradesh [1994 (2) ALT cri 408]. Similarly, at present, how can X be guilty of possession of
    proceeds of crime under the PMLA when the crime of cheating under IPC has not yet been decided?

    c. Concept of Simultaneous Trial

    Lastly, in order to clarify the chronology of procedure desired by X, Adv. Joshi took the example of a
    complaint and a counter-complaint in case of the same transaction, the Supreme Court has held that
    the judgment in one case cannot be pronounced before the other as the judgment in one case renders
    the other infructuous. (as held in Harjinder Singh V. State of Punjab, [AIR 1985 SC 404]);

    Adv. Joshi prayed that at the very least the Court may be pleased to hold the judgments of the trials
    regarding the charges under IPC and PC Act and PMLA at the same time, but the latter not preceding
    the former.

    ORDER OF THE COURT

    No order was passed by the Court in this proceeding and the matter was posted to the next Friday, 16th
    April, 2021 to hear the submissions of the opposite party in this matter.

    Comments on the Trial

    None.

    (Mr. Uma Shankar Singh, Advocate)

    34 | P a g e
    4.1.1) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS - 1

    IN THE CHAMBER OF:

    ADV. Uma Shankar Singh

    PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT:

    Pranav Reddy – Indian (CEO of Cooler Pvt. Ltd.)

    {Names and Particulars are confidential}

    DATE: 9th April 2022

    INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR HIS/HER CLIENT:


    (MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)

    The main purpose of the client interview is to understand the case from the client’s perspective and to
    propose a solution for the same. While interviewing the client, the lawyer must be mindful of his or
    her professional and ethical responsibilities and establish legal issues arising from the interviews. The
    lawyer is required to take the adequate steps before, during and after the interview of the client.

    Since Mr. Pranav Reddy is an old client of Adv. Uma Shankar Singh, no need arose to enquire about
    details of the client like his name, occupation, place of residence etc. Adv. Joshi was extremely familiar
    with the client and his background.

    Adv. Uma Shankar Singh first interviewed the client regarding the facts of the case in order to better
    understand his standing. The lawyer used the three step method of interviewing with the client;

    Part I: The lawyer first attempted to understand the facts of the case and understand the client’s
    involvement.

    Part II: The lawyer then proceeded to try and understand the jurisdiction of the case, since it involved
    international jurisdiction. The lawyer contacted a known lawyer in Dubai regarding the case.

    Part III: The lawyer attempted to establish the possible grounds for the case.

    35 | P a g e
    FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF:

    The client, Pranav Reddy invested in a company by the name of RAKYA, based in Ras Al Khaimah
    (an emirate of the United Arab Emirates). RAKYA is a government owned entity, with almost 68%
    share in the company. The government would issue bonds and other instruments on behalf of RAKYA.

    Pranav Reddy invested around USD 140 million into the company in the year 2008. This amount was
    invested by the client towards the construction of certain roads by the company. Pranav Reddy was
    supposed to receive a return from his investments once the construction of the roads was completed
    and functional.

    The returns were supposed to be funded by the tolls collected, however, the company did not end up
    completing the project and hence the client never received any returns.

    The client met with the members of the company in 2016 regarding the default on his investment
    returns.

    The client and the members of the company arrived at a settlement agreement where the client agreed
    to RAKYA getting a new investor through which the client will get back part of his investment and
    can then keep the profit.

    The settlement agreement also mentioned that the jurisdiction will only apply to the courts of Ras al
    Khaimah. It acknowledged that earlier the Arbitration Laws of India were applicable, but the 2016
    settlement agreement modified this provision and now only the Arbitration Laws of London and its
    procedures are applicable.

    Post this 2016 settlement agreement, RAKYA initiated criminal proceedings against Pranav Reddy, in
    the courts of Ras al Khaimah. The court decided in favour of RAKYA through an ex-parte order.

    Pranav Reddy had approached Adv. Joshi in order to better understand the measures that he could take
    to protect himself against the proceedings and judgement delivered by the court of Ras al Khaimah.

    LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE:

    The lawyer sought the following documents from the client in order to understand the case;

    a. Formal communication regarding the client’s investment into RAKYA.

    b. The Settlement Agreement and related documents.

    36 | P a g e
    c. Any communication that may show that RAKYA threatened or attempted to
    threaten the client.

    d. Communication to show that the investment of the client was made with the
    consent of all members of the company and not just its C.E.O.

    e. Other documents related to the case.

    COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE:

    Advocate Uma Shankar Singh provided Pranav Reddy (the client) with three different options
    regarding how he must approach the case.

    Option 1: The client may contest the case in Dubai.

    Option 2: The client can wait and see if the company will enforce the RAK decree in India. If the
    company chooses to do so, Pranav Reddy can take action under Section 13 of the Code of Civil
    Procedure.

    Option 3: The client may file an anti-suit injunction. An anti-suit injunction is an order issued by a
    court or arbitral tribunal that prevents an opposing party from commencing or continuing a proceeding
    in another jurisdiction or forum.

    OBSERVATION IF ANY:

    An interesting observation I have made of the present case is that the lawyer offered the client all
    possible solutions, even the ones that he felt would amount to being unsuccessful. For example, Adv.
    Joshi mentioned the option of the client contesting the case in Dubai, however, he also told the client
    that that method of approach would not succeed.

    (Adv. Uma Shankar Singh)

    SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCAT

    37 | P a g e
    4.1.3 NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR

    FILING COMPLAINT/ CASE ETC. (CIVIL)

    NATURE OF DOCUMENTS

    1) Plaint/Petition- Structure of written complaint or allegation- Person filing the plaint is called the
    plaintiff or petitioner- Person against whom the plaint is filed is called the defendant

    Contents of Plaint1. Name of Court/ Forum2. Names, designation, address of both parties3. Provision
    of Law under which the court has jurisdiction4. Main Content is the statement of facts and the specific
    grounds on which the suit is filed5. Clause showing payment of court fees6. Clause relating to
    limitation7. Verification of plaint by the plaintiff and their representatives 8. Prayer and reliefs
    claimed.

    VAKALATNAMA

    Vakalatnama ", is a document, by which the party filing the case authorizes the Advocate to represent
    on their behalf. On General Terms, a Vakalatnama may contain the falling terms

    : The client will not hold the Advocate responsible for any decision. The client shall bear all the costs
    and /expenses incurred during the proceedings. The advocate shall have right to retain the documents
    unless complete fees are paid. The client is free to disengage the Advocate at any stage of the
    Proceedings. The Advocate shall have all the right to take decisions on his own in the court of Law,
    during the hearing, to the best interest of client. Vakalatnama is affixed on the last page of plaint / suit
    and is kept along with court records. No fees are required to be paid on it.

    COURT FEES & STAMP

    The Court Fees Act of 1870 governs rules relating to court fees and stamps. A certain per rate
    percentage value on a fixed amount of court fees is payable while filing a suit. The Court Fees Act,
    1870 states that all kind of court fees levied under the Act shall be paid through stamps. This is the
    general mode of payment of court fees throughout the country. However, the state enactments may
    govern the types of stamps that shall be used for this purpose. Section 26 of the Act specifies that
    whether the stamps shall be adhesive or impressed is up to the appropriate government to decide.

    38 | P a g e
    PROCEDURE

    1. Filing of Divorce Petition along with documents such as marriage certificate, Residence,
    Financial documents if any, schedule of co-owned assets, statement of the parties.

    2. Filing Vakalatnama: Authorising the advocate to represent the plaintiff before the court

    3. Plaintiff should verify the contents of the petition and sign on the same before it is filed
    before the registry

    4. Appropriate judicial stamp must be purchased from the society office and attached to
    petition.

    5. The plaintiff is required to verify the contents of the plaint and the evidence given and verify
    that the contents of the plaint is accurate to the best of his knowledge.

    6. The lawyers are required to verify the documents and translation of documents.

    7. 3 copies of the Petition must be printed. One for the petitioner, one for the court and one
    for the defendant.

    8. Lastly the plaint/petition must be filed with the registry.

    39 | P a g e
    4.1.1) INTERVIEWING SESSIONS - 2

    IN THE CHAMBER OF:


    Adv. Uma Shankar Singh
    PARTICULARS OF THE CLIENT:
    Confidential
    DATE: 6th April 2021

    INTERVIEWING METHODS FOLLOWED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR HIS/HERCLIENT:


    (MODE OF CONDUCTING INTERVIEW)
    The main purpose of the client interview is to understand the case from the client’s
    perspectiveand to propose a solution for the same. While interviewing the client, the lawyer must be
    mindful of his or her professional and ethical responsibilities and establish legal issues arising from the
    interviews. The lawyer is required to take the adequate steps before, during and after the interview of
    the client.

    Since the client was a new client certain niceties such as the clients name, occupation, place of
    residence etc. were enquired. This was done in order to imbibe a feeling of trust upon the lawyer and
    introduce an air of relaxation. This will help the client gain confidence in the lawyer’s ability and skill.

    After the exchange of niceties, the lawyer moved on to questions related to the case, this was
    done in order to better understand the facts.

    The following questions were asked:


     How long have you been living with your wife?
     How long have you cohabited during the period of this marriage?
     Have any children risen as a result of this marriage? If yes, how many children?
    Howhave the children been?
     When did you first notice signs of hatred in the marriage?
     Can you provide proof of your wife physically or mentally harassing you and
    your family?

    40 | P a g e
    The lawyer and his junior were jotting down notes on the answers provided by the client. The questions
    were left open ended with the intention to obtain as much information as possible. The lawyer finally
    asked the client about his intentions to go ahead with the divorce.

    FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF:


    The husband and wife were married in August 2002, according to full Vedic rights &
    ritualsthe same was solemnised in Mumbai, Maharashtra. The petitioner and respondent were Hindus
    before and after marriage, in India. Two daughters were born in wedlock.

    Till the summer of 2016 everything was fine, but past that the husband alleged that the
    wife become 'uncultured & arrogant’. The wife exercised total disrespected and carelessness not only
    for the husband but also for mother-in-law who was a diabetic with a chronic heart disease. The
    behaviour was irrational and unreasonable A unreasonable, and this led to a lot of quarrel which not
    only affected the mind of the parents but also their children.

    The wife indulged in childlike behaviour like hiding car keys, close the door to prevent
    himfrom leaving the building. She was a housewife but choose to not do any house hold chores and
    would often make calls to the plaintiff’s office mental agony and harassment to him due to her

    The husband eventually found this cruelty intolerable and took his wife to her parents’
    houseand left her there. He continued to stay in the matrimonial home with their daughters.

    On October 12, 2005 the respondent wife arrived at the matrimonial house, unannounced
    "abusing him, father in law and her children. She created a violent atmosphere and she even damaged
    property and caused personal injury to the plaintiff by throwing a vase at him which hit his head.

    The plaintiff, post this behaviour, lodged a police complaint with regard to the same and
    filed an instant petition for granting divorce on grounds of cruelty because he could not take any more

    The advocate then filed a petition on grounds of cruelty u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage
    Act, 1955 on behalf of the plaintiff (husband)

    LIST OF RELEVANT DOCUMENTS ESSENTIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE:

    1. Police complaint lodged at the police station against the wife.


    2. Pictures of wounds resulting from injury caused to husband by a mug thrown by wife.

    3. WhatsApp messages and screenshots showing signs of abuse by wife.

    4. Photographs of the damage caused to house property by wife.

    41 | P a g e
    5. Marriage certificate.

    6. Statement given by mother-in-law, father-in-law and children.

    COURSE OF ACTION ENVISAGED / SUGGESTED BY THE ADVOCATE:


    The advocate advised the Husband to file a petition on grounds of cruelty due to the unreasonable
    pain and agony caused.

    The advocate further requested the client to provide copied of all important documents/proofs that
    indicated that the wife was unwilling/disinterested in continuing the marriage and held no wellbeing
    towards the future of the kids.

    OBSERVATION IF ANY:
    The facts and circumstance of this case make this case noteworthy.
    Learnt the importance of developing lawyer-client relationships based on mutual trust especially in
    delicate matters such as this.

    (Adv. Uma Shankar Singh)

    SIGN AND SEAL OF THE ADVOCATE

    42 | P a g e
    4.1.3) NATURE OF DOCUMENTS, COURT PAPERS AND PROCEDURE FOR

    FILING COMPLAINT/ CASE ETC. (CRIMINAL):

    NATURE OF DOCUMENT:

    1. COMPLAINT:

    A formal accusation against a person, alleging that the person has committed a crime. The
    complainant files the complaint against the respondent.

    A complaint must contain the following;


    a. Name of the Magistrate/ Judge/ Court;
    b. Name/ designation/ address of the parties involved;
    c. Provision of law and jurisdiction of court.
    d. Contents of Plaint;
    e. Verification.
    VAKALATNAMA:

    Documents empowering a lawyer to act for and on behalf of his or her client. By virtue of this document,
    a person authorized as an advocate can represent the client before the court. The Vakalatnama may
    contain provisions relating to the rights and immunities of the Advocate.

    PROCEDURE:

    As per the provisions of C.P.C, 1973, a criminal offence can be of two types;
    a. cognizable
    b. non-cognizable.
    A cognizable offence requires a complaint to be filed before a police office. If the police officer
    fails to respect the complaint, it can then be filed before a magistrate.
    In case of a non-cognizable offence, the police cannot arrest the accused without a warrant as
    well as cannot start an investigation without the permission of the court.
    For a non-cognizable offence, a judicial process can be initiated by filing a criminal complaint
    before a competent court.

    43 | P a g e
    A criminal complaint in a non-cognizable case is required to be filed at a court registry.
    Alegal stamp must be attached and verified by the complainant.

    The Vakalatnama is to be filed, authorizing the advocate to represent the complainant


    beforethe court.

    44 | P a g e
    INTERNSHIPS

    INTERNSHIP – I

    SUMMARY OF INTERNSHIP-I: Dinesh Jaiswal and Associates


    About: Dinesh Jaiswal is practicing lawyer in Delhi High Court. I was assigned to the dispute resolution
    team in my time there.

    Selection Process: For the selection, I had to fill a 14-page questionnaire concerned mainly with
    understanding my areas of interest in law and my reasons for pursuing said field. I also had to submit
    formal curriculum vitae to augment this form. After a formal consideration I was formally admitted to
    their internship program. Originally slated for two weeks, I was also given a week’s extension.

    Tasks: As a part of the Dispute Resolution team, I got the opportunity to deal with a diverse range of
    matters. On my very first day I was entrusted with a research project broadly falling under the realm of
    Company Law (which I hadn’t studied in college yet), and thereafter I was exposed to even more work
    that would be new to me. From proofreading and double-checking formal petitions to extensive due
    diligence in relation with a major arbitration dispute, drafting concept notes in relation with a formal
    statement of advice for a large conglomerate on Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and conducting
    further research with relation to points of law broadly under the category of Contract and Property Law
    for the aforementioned arbitration dispute.

    Environment: The environment at the firm was enriching; it was refreshingly welcoming and yet
    engendered a healthy sense of competitiveness and desire for excellence. The associates under whom I
    worked were extremely generous and would make sure that we didn’t face any discomfort during the
    tenure of our internship at the organization. The partner who supervised said associates also had a
    meeting with us and had a wonderful conversation about trajectories we could take going forward
    professionally.

    NAME AND ADDRESS OF ORGANISATION/EMPLOYER:

    Dinesh Jaiswal & Associates Mumbai, Maharashtra.

    DURATION OF INTERNSHIP:
    May 1, 2021 – May 30, 2021
    WORK DONE DURING INTERNSHIP:

    1. Research on Company law related to Disclosure: A particular client was ordered by the court to
    disclose certain documents pertaining to the operation of the company, to the other parties in a
    dispute. My task was to research on the law relating to disclosure.
    2. Proofreading Plaints: This included looking for simple grammatical and semantic errors, as well
    as checking for appropriate citations and that the quotations given on the plaint were actually in
    the judgements quoted.
    3. Due Diligence: This related to a major arbitration suit where I had to go through 27 legal
    commentaries – length binders of documents with six other interns, and present this information
    in a soft copy format in a systematic manner within the week. This was an especially grueling
    experience, but ultimately instructive.

    4. Research for Concept Note relating to Advice to Large Conglomerate: A large conglomerate
    wanted to know the law relating to interactions between their personnel and public officials. The
    question related to the extent to which such engagement was allowed, and the extent and form
    of liability that its breach would invite as well as the procedure it would entail.

    5. Research on Points of Law relating to the Arbitration Suit: Due to unforeseen circumstances
    which pushed the timeline short for future proceedings, we were entrusted with researching
    points of law which could bolster our claims in the arbitration meeting. Our research took us all
    the way to researching first principles in the area of Contract, Property and Company law.

    WHAT DID YOU LEARN DURING THE INTERNSHIP? LIST SKILLS ANDKNOWLEDGE YOU
    HAVE GAINED:

    1. Understood how to undertake a due diligence process;


    2. Understood the law of disclosure as well as incorporation in Company Law, aswell as basic
    principles of Contract and Property Law;

    3. Learnt how to draft helpful concept notes for intra-organizational work whileresearching
    on the topic of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; and

    4. Learnt how to research and also the correct manner of sharing this research withothers in a
    manner that is easily usable for others.
    INTERNSHIP – II

    SUMMARY OF INTERNSHIP- II:


    About: Sharvind Kumar sir is advocate on record in the Supreme Court of India. He is considered an
    expert inConstitutional matters and deals with a variety of matters generally falling within the purview
    of Civil Lawas well as Criminal Law.

    Selection Process: I got the chance to intern with Kumar Sir purely by accident; I had sent a formal
    application via email to his chambers a few weeks before the tenure of my internship began. He
    approved my request because he didn’t have other interns working under him at the time.

    Tasks: I was entrusted primarily with drafting and research related responsibilities. Sir had just recently
    finished the Ayodhya hearing a month back and was now currently involved with the hearing relating
    to the abrogation of Article 370. I also got the opportunity to work on matters relating to the law of
    Special Economic Zones, which was a novel experience. Other than that, I primarily worked on criminal
    law matters.

    Environment: The general environment was sober and serious, and yet it wasn’t a boring place to work
    at all. It was actually a challenging environment because Sir would take direct interest in our work and
    would regularly rely on our research for his daily meetings in clients. This instilled in us the sense of
    responsibility in relation with the work with which we were entrusted.

    NAME AND ADDRESS OF ORGANISATION/EMPLOYER:


    Sharvind Kumar & Associates
    H 78, near Deshbandhu college, Kalkaji, New Delhi- 110019

    DURATION OF INTERNSHIP:
    1st May 2020 – 31st May 2020
    WORK DONE DURING INTERNSHIP:

    1. Upkeep of Files: We had to regularly assist Sir in his daily pleadings at the Supreme Court as
    well as the meetings, and as such had to be completely thorough with both the contents of the
    relevant files but also the manner in which they were organized. This was the first time when
    instead of vaguely recognizing how files are kept, we got to understand why things are kept the
    way they are.

    2. Research relating to Special Economic Zones (SEZ): The law relating to SEZ is intended to
    facilitate economic activity and particularly improve exports for the country. I got the
    opportunity to research on this law which hitherto I had no opportunity to explore.
    3. Research related to Constitutional Law: Particularly with relation to the issue of abrogation of
    Article 370 we had the opportunity to develop points of law for the purpose of preparing
    pleadings.
    4. Research on other Civil and Criminal Matters: Particularly I had the opportunity to work on
    cases relating to dowry death as well as a case on Service Law.

    WHAT DID YOU LEARN DURING THE INTERNSHIP? LIST SKILLS ANDKNOWLEDGE YOU
    HAVE GAINED:

    1. Learnt how to maintain case files.

    2. Learnt how to prepare case notes and assist the senior counsel
    in their operations.
    3. Learnt how client interviews are conducted and generally how the advocate’s
    temperament towards the case and towards the clients is very important.
    4. Researched on novel areas of law to which I had little exposure before; and
    5. Learnt how the law is applied on complex real-life situations, thus deepening my
    understanding of legal concepts.
    INTERNSHIP – III

    SUMMARY OF INTERNSHIP-I:
    About: Sarvahitey is a non-profit think tank based in New Delhi that seeks to effect social change by
    public policy. It undertakes research projects as well as outreach and educational activities and has a
    liberal bent in its operations. It regularly deals with a diverse range of persons from students, academics
    and working professionals to journalists and public officials.

    Selection Process: I had been interested in the field of public policy for a long timeand in October 2020
    I finally found an opportunity to apply at this organization. By this time, I had already completed
    multiple courses with the organization, but now the organization adjudged me worthy of their internship
    program.

    Tasks: I was part of the State Education Project, whose task was to analyze the quality of legislation of
    Education Laws passed on the state level to check the extent to which there were legal and economic
    safeguards with respect to Government power on the education sector and the extent to which said
    power was circumscribed with uniform standards. We had a detailed checklist on which we had to work
    in relation to this. We(the other interns and I) also had to make presentations about our progress and our
    findings, where we also got to directly influence the direction of the project by suggesting the frame and
    the way our findings could be consolidated.

    Environment: This was my favorite internship in law school. The people in the organization were
    extraordinarily polite and accommodating and were entirely cognizant of the special circumstances that
    working from home in the midst of a pandemic would bring. They were also extremely receptive to
    everything from suggestions to downright opposition to their understanding on key points, which was
    instrumental in helping me feel appreciated.

    NAME AND ADDRESS OF ORGANISATION/EMPLOYER:


    Sarvahitey
    F-56, Hoshiyarpur, Block F, Sector 51, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201307

    DURATION OF INTERNSHIP:
    November 01, 2020 – 30th December 2020
    WORK DONE DURING INTERNSHIP:

    1. Analysis: This involved making important judgements on the nature of


    different provisions, identifying different kinds of provisions (like those
    relating to approvals and enforcement) and also making specific notes on how
    exactly these provisions succeeded or failed in circumscribing limits to government
    power by either uniformlyapplicable standards or by way of safeguards available to
    non- state actors against state actors.

    2. Presentation: This was where we got to go beyond the mandate of our daily
    workandcorrelate our findings from various legislations, hence getting the
    opportunity to compare legislations from multiple states on common standards.
    We also learnt, through the process of developing and delivering our presentations,
    how research can be condensed and systematically organized to make it as
    consumable as possible.

    WHAT DID YOU LEARN DURING THE INTERNSHIP? LIST


    SKILLS ANDKNOWLEDGE YOU HAVE GAINED:

    1. Time Management: This analysis was exhausting work; a handful of


    candidates hadto analyze over 140 laws relating to education on the
    state level and collate our findings. Given our limited tenure, this work had to
    be done efficiently and so we learnt how to streamline this process.

    2. Coordination: For the same reasons as the ones stated in the previous point,
    we found ourselves developing ingenious ways of coordinating efforts
    amongst ourselves.
    3. Administrative Law: It must be obvious that legally speaking,
    administrative law was the basis for much of this work. I got an
    unprecedented opportunity to understand thefunctioning of the principles
    of Administrative Law in real life situations.
    H-78, near Deshbandhu College,
    Kalkalji, New Delhi, Delhi 110019
    sarvindkumar@rediffmail.com

    Sharvind Kumar & 01123785508


    Associates

    30.05.2020

    TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

    This is to certify that Mr. Ashish Dalal, a student of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), Symbiosis Law School,
    Pune, has completed his internship with our office from 01.09.2019 to30.05.2020.
    01.05.2020 to 30.09.2019.

    During the course of his internship, he drafted various complaints, reply and he attended criminal and
    civil proceedings in various District Courts of Delhi, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, and also attended
    various proceedings before various tribunals across the city.

    He studied case files and attended respective court proceedings in order to understand the practical
    implication of matters. He also assisted the office in legal research and various filings and
    miscellaneous works.

    I wish him success in life.

    Sharvind Kumar
    (Advocate)
    Dinesh Jaiswal & Associates

    C-483, Defence Colony, New Delhi, 110024


    dineshjaiswal1974@gmail.com 011-45266985

    30.05.2021

    TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

    This is to certify that Mr. Ashish Dalal, a student of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), Symbiosis Law School, Pune,
    has completed his internship with our office from 01.05.2021 to 30.05.2021.

    During the course of his internship, he drafted various complaints, reply and he attended criminal and
    civil proceedings in various District Courts of Delhi, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, and also attended
    various proceedings before various tribunals across the city.

    He studied case files and attended respective court proceedings in order to understand the practical
    implication of matters. He also assisted the office in legal research and various filings and miscellaneous
    works.

    I extend my hearty congratulations to him for finishing the tenure of this internship.

    Dinesh Jaiswal
    (Advocate)
    SARVAHITEY
    SARVAHITEY
    Registered under Indian Trusts Act, 1882: Regn. No. 150/2015

    Date: 31st December 2020

    TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

    This is to certify that Mr. Ashish Dalal, a student of Symbiosis Law School, Pune,
    has volunteered/ interned with Sarvahitey for the month of November and December 2020,
    for a period of two months.

    During this time, Mr. Ashish Dalal was involved in various activities of Sarvahitey,
    including but not limited to spreading awareness, researching socio-legal topics,
    managing Social Media, and providing hyper-local information concerning Covid-19.

    He acted as an enthusiastic and intelligent member of Sarvahitey and helped us


    positively impact society. We wish his all the best in his future endeavours.

    Regards,

    Keshav Datta, Advocate


    Founder Trustee, Sarvahitey

    Noida: F-56, Sector 51, Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201301 Call – 7011626918 WhatsApp - 8285423423
    New Delhi: D-7/7487 VasantKunj, New Delhi- 110070
    Email ID: prem@sarvahitey.org
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sarvahitey
    SARVAHITEY
    Registered under Indian Trusts Act, 1882: Regn. No. 150/2015

    keshav@sarvahitey.org
    #7982580798

    Noida: F-56, Sector 51, Noida, Uttar Pradesh- 201301 Call – 7011626918 WhatsApp - 8285423423
    New Delhi: D-7/7487 VasantKunj, New Delhi- 110070
    Email ID: prem@sarvahitey.org
    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sarvahitey

    You might also like