Proposition 1:

1. BeauCreme is a well-known Indian beauty brand that sells a variety of cosmetic products.
They recently launched a highly successful marketing campaign featuring a unique and
catchy song for their new lin
2. e of anti-aging creams. This song was created by a music production company specifically for
BeauCreme and is copyrighted under BeauCreme's name.
3. Recently, BeauCreme discovered that AKEERA, a rival beauty brand, has launched a new
marketing campaign for their own anti-aging cream line. The competitor's campaign features
a song that is strikingly similar to BeauCreme's copyrighted song in both melody and lyrics.
4. BeauCreme believes that AKEERA has infringed upon their copyright by copying the song
without permission. This unauthorized use is likely to cause confusion among consumers and
damage BeauCreme's brand identity.
5. BeauCreme decides to consult with their legal team and move forward with filing a Suit.
6. Draft the suit.
 IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE, JUNIOR DIVISION
AT JALPAIGURI

SUIT No. ………………. OF 2023.

BeauCreme-

-Plaintiff/petitioner.
Vs.
.
AKEERA - Defendant/O.P. s

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER XXXIX, RULES-1 & 2 READ WITH SEC. 151 OF THE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE.

The above named Plaintiff / Petitioner most respectfully begs to state as follows

1. That the Plaintiff/Petitioner has filed the above

noted suit for declaration, perpetual injunction
and consequential reliefs, the plaint may kindly
be treated as a part and parcel of this application.
2. The plaintiff, BeauCreme, asserts their
inheritance of copyright ownership in the original
musical and lyrical work titled "The Girl in White
Darkness", meant for selling their anti-aging
cream, edited by the Chief Designer in 2000.
3. The defendant, AKEERA is a beauty brand and
engages in the public performance in various
brand promotion shows without obtaining any
written consent from the plaintiff.
4. The defendant, without obtaining authorization
from the plaintiff, has infringed the copyright of
the musical and lyrical work by adapting and
converting it into a musical jingle titled ‘Gumrah’
for public performance and for promotion on
social media.
5. The defendant is currently in possession of the
manuscript of the rendition work and intends to
use the same under the title "Gumrah," edited by
their in-house designer.
6. The plaintiff contends that the defendant's actions
have caused significant damage.
 7. The plaintiff files this suit for the infringement of
copyright and adaptation of the musical work by
the defendant.
8. That the Plaintiff/Petitioner shall suffer
irreparable loss and injury, if temporary / ad-
interim injunction as prayed for be not granted
against the defendants/O.P who shall not suffer
anything if the injunction as prayed for is granted.

PRAYER:
That under the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that your Honour may be kind enough to pass
temporary interim / ad-interim injunction restraining the Defendants/O.P.s and their men and persons
from:-

a. Restraining the OPS from performing

b. Passing order to pay the damages for infringement.

And for this act of kindness your plaintiffs / petitioners as

in duty bound shall ever pray.

VERIFICATION
Mr. Ajay Pandey (owner of BeauCreme) do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraph 01
to 18 above are to the best of my knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer
before the Ld. Court. I sign this Verification on this the _____ day of _________ 2023 at Siliguri.

________________
Signature

AFFIDAVIT

Mr. Ajay Pandey solemnly affirm and say as follows:-

1. That I am the Mr. Ajay Pandey in the above noted Suit and I am well acquainted with
the facts and circumstances of this case.
2. That the statements made in paragraph 01 to 9 above are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld Court.

I sign this Affidavit on this the _______ day of

_________ 2023 at Jalpaiguri.
 __________________________
Declarant
Identified by me
Advocate/Siliguri

Proposition 2:

1. Mrs Indrani Das, petitioner, filed a suit against Mr. Harsh Bhogle, respondent, for recovery of
possession of a house at SBI Market Area near Salugara, Siliguri, Darjeeling. The case is pending
in the court of Civil Judge Senior Division at Siliguri.
2. The trial court was framing issues on 1/1/22 and direct the petitioner to produce evidence along
with list of wishes. She was making a request that the witnesses must be summoned by the court
because many of them are government officials, so they need to prove and produce official
record.
3. In the next date of hearing two of them had appeared and gave their statement however the
court passed an order that the remaining witnesses be produced by the plaintiff on his own
without seeking the assistance of the court.
4. Draft a revision petition to quash and set aside the order passed by the honourable court and to
direct the court to provide assistance for summoning the plaintiff’s witness.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA

Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Civil Revision No xxx of 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

Indrani Das

…Petitioner

Versus

Harsh Bhogle

…Respondent

IN THE MATTER OF: CIVIL REVISION AGAINST THE ORDER DATE 1/2/22 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SUB-JUDGE, IST CLASS IN THE SUIT ENTITLED Indrani Das-VS.- Harsh Bhogle (CIVIL SUIT NO. xxx OF
2022)

May it please the Hon'ble Chief Justice, High Court of Calcutta and his companion Justices. The
petitioner MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the petitioner named above has filed a suit

against the respondents for the recovery of
possession of a house situated in Salugara, fully
described in the plaint.

2. That on being summoned the respondent

appeared before the court below and filed his
written statement wherein he denied the
petitioner's title set up in the suit property.

3. That the trial court framed issues on 1/1/22 and

directed the petitioner (plaintiff) to produce
evidence, upon which the petitioner promptly
furnished to the court below a list of witnesses and
also deposited their diet expenses etc., making a
request that the witness be summoned by that
Court.

4. That on a previous date of hearing, two witness of

the petitioner had appeared and their statements
were recorded. However, the learned Presiding
Officer of the court below passed an order that the
remaining witnesses be produced by the petitioner-
plaintiff on his own without seeking the assistance
of the court. This order was passed despite a
request by the petitioner that at least those witness
named in the list who are Government officials
 should be summoned by the court, as they are
required to produce and prove some official records.

5. That on the next date of hearing the learned trial

court by the order impugned in this revision closed
the evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff on the
ground that the remaining witnesses were not
produced by her.

6. That the impugned order has caused great

prejudice to the petitioner and if the same is
allowed to stand the petitioner's suit is bound to fail.

7. That the trial court has unjustifiably denied

assistance of the court to the petitioner-plaintiff to
secure the attendance of his witnesses. The
interests of justice demand that he is provided with
all legal assistance in this regard.

PRAYER:

In the facts and circumstances discussed above the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court be
pleased to quash and set aside the order under revision and direct the court below to provide
assistance of the court for summoning the plaintiff-witnesses.

VERIFICATION
Ms Indrani Das do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraph 01 to 12 above are to the best
of my knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld. Court. I sign
this Verification on this the _____ day of _________ 2023 at Siliguri.

________________
Signature

AFFIDAVIT

Ms Indrani Das solemnly affirm and say as follows:-

3. That I am the Ms Indrani Das in the above noted Suit and I am well acquainted with the
facts and circumstances of this case.
4. That the statements made in paragraph 01 to 12 above are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld Court.

I sign this Affidavit on this the _______ day of

_________ 2023 at Siliguri.
 __________________________
Declarant
Identified by me
Advocate/Siliguri

Proposition 3

Ms. Aisha Kapoor, residing in Mumbai, Maharashtra, entered into a written agreement with Mr.
Rohan Desai on 01.10.2023, for the purchase of a specific plot of land he owned. The agreed sale
price was Rs. 50 lakhs, with a clause mentioning completion of the sale by transferring the property
deed within three months.

Ms. Kapoor fulfilled her part of the agreement by paying the entire Rs. 50 lakhs to Mr. Desai on the
signing date itself. However, despite several requests and passing the deadline, Mr. Desai refused to
initiate the property transfer process.

Ms. Kapoor consulted a lawyer who advised her that since the land is unique and holds specific value
to her, monetary compensation might not be sufficient. The lawyer recommended filing a suit for
specific performance of contract, compelling Mr. Desai to complete the land transfer as per the
agreement.

With documented proof of the agreement, payment receipt, and communication attempts, Ms.
Kapoor decided to move forward with the suit for specific performance against Mr. Desai.

Draft the suit for Specific Performance of Contract as per the provisions mentioned in Indian
Contracts Act.
 IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE (SENIOR DIVISION),

THANE COURT (DIST), MUMBAI

SUIT NO. XXX OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :

Aisha Kapoor, Mumbai

...PLAINTIFF

Versus

Rohan Desai, Mumbai

...DEFENDANT

SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT UNDER CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the plaintiff is a resident

of Thane
2. That the defendant is the
absolute owner of the
property bearing no xxx
(hereinafter refered to as the
suit property).
3. That the plaintiff approached
the defendant for purchasing
the suit property on 25/09/23
and the plaintiff and the
defendant discussed the
terms and conditions.
4. That on 1/10/2023, the
plaintiff and the defendant
entered into an agreement in
writing whereby the
defendant agreed to sell his
property to the plaintiff for
Rs. 50 lakhs. The copy of the
agreement is annexed as
Annexure A.
5. That the plaintiff paid Rs 50
lakhs to the defendant and it
 was decided that the sale
deed will be executed and
the possession of the suit
property will be handed over
to the plaintiff.
6. That the plaintiff approached
the defendant and requested
him to execute the sale deed
along with handing over of
the possession of the suit
property to the plaintiff.
However, the defendant
refused to execute the sale
deed.
7. That the plaintiff approached
the defendant for execution
of the sale deed on various
occasions, however, the
defendant refused to execute
the sale deed on one pretext
or the other.
8. That the plaintiff finally
issued a legal notice dated
xx/xx/xxxx to the defendant
calling upon the defendant to
perform his part of the
agreement by executing the
sale deed and handing over
the possession of the suit
property to the plaintiff.
However, the defendant
failed to comply with his part
of the agreement and did not
reply to the legal notice.
9. That the cause of action
arose on 1/1/2022 when the
defendant agreed to sell the
suit property to the plaintiff
and the cause of action is still
subsisting as the defendant
has refused to perform his
part of the agreement.
10. That the suit is within the
period of limitation.
11. That this Hon’ble Court has
jurisdiction to entertain this
suit because the cause of
action arose within the
 territorial jurisdiction of the
court.
12. That the requisite court fees
have been paid.

PRAYER:

It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

1. pass a decree of specific performance of the agreement in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendant directing the defendant to execute the sale deed and hand over the possession of the suit
property to the plaintiff,

2. award cost of the suit in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant;and

3. pass such other and further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper on the facts and in the
circumstances of this case.

And for this act of kindness your plaintiffs / petitioners as in duty bound
shall ever pray.

VERIFICATION
Ms Aisha Kapoor do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraph 01 to 12 above are to the
best of my knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld. Court. I
sign this Verification on this the _____ day of _________ 2023 at Thane.

________________
Signature

AFFIDAVIT

Ms Aisha Kapoor solemnly affirm and say as follows:-

5. That I am the Ms Aisha Kapoor in the above noted Suit and I am well acquainted with
the facts and circumstances of this case.
6. That the statements made in paragraph 01 to 12 above are true to the best of my
knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld Court.
 I sign this Affidavit on this the _______ day of
_________ 2023 at Thane.

__________________________
Declarant
Identified by me
Advocate/Siliguri

Proposition (STAY APPLICATION):

1. Rahul Sharma, a renowned artist based in Delhi, was commissioned by Mr. and Mrs. Ghosh
on 15.01.2024 to create a specific portrait for their upcoming wedding anniversary. The
signed agreement clearly outlined the artwork details, size, and a completion date of
15.04.2024.
2. Mr. Sharma had already begun work on the portrait and received half of the agreed price as
an upfront payment. However, on 01.03.2024, Mr. and Mrs. Ghosh informed him of their
decision to cancel the wedding due to unforeseen circumstances. They demanded a full
refund and requested that Mr. Sharma halt any further work on the portrait.
3. Mr. Sharma argued that since the artwork is partially complete and specific to their request,
a full refund wouldn't be fair. He also expressed his willingness to hold onto the unfinished
portrait until they might need it in the future.
4. Unconvinced, Mr. and Mrs. Ghosh proceeded to file a lawsuit against Mr. Sharma seeking a
complete refund and aimed to seek the rightful ownership and value of the partially
completed.
5. There being a former suit, Mr. Sharma anticipated that ther can be further repurcussions
during the ongoing suit.
6. To prevent them from taking any arbitrary decision with regards to the selling or disposing of
the unfinished artwork, Mr. Sharma decided to file a stay petition portrait.
7. Draft the said Stay Petition as per Section 10 of CPC.
 IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE, JUNIOR DIVISION
AT ROHINI, DELHI

SUIT No. ………………. OF 2024.

RAHUL SHARMA

-Plaintiff/petitioner.
Vs.
.
XXX GHOSH
- Defendant/O.P. s

APPLICATION UNDER SEC. 10 AND SEC. 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE.

The above named Plaintiff / Petitioner most respectfully begs to state as follows

1. That the Plaintiff/Petitioner has filed the above noted suit for
declaration of stay and consequential reliefs, the plaint may kindly
be treated as a part and parcel of this application.
2. That there is an ongoing suit with original suit no. as xxxxx of
2024 with regards to the justifiable monetary compensation and
rightful ownership of the painting in question.
3. That the Plaintiff has a good case and hopes to succeed in it.
4. That the Plaintiff/Petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury,
if stay order as prayed for be not granted against the
defendants/O.P who shall not suffer anything if the injunction as
prayed for is granted.

PRAYER:

That under the aforesaid circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that ad-interim injunction,
restraining the respondents /defendant from dispossessing the applicant/ plaintiff, interfering,
alienating, selling, transferring, changing the nature of the property in question, entering into
any agreement to sell or any other agreement with anyone with regard to the property in question, till
the final decision of the main suit in any manner whatsoever, may kindly be issued in favour of
applicant/plaintiff
 And for this act of kindness your plaintiffs / petitioners as in duty bound
shall ever pray.

VERIFICATION
Mr. Rahul Sharma do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraph 01 to 4 above are to the
best of my knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld. Court. I
sign this Verification on this the _____ day of _________ 2023 at Rohini.

________________
Signature

AFFIDAVIT

Mr. Rahul Sharma solemnly affirm and say as follows:-

7. That I am the Mr. Rahul Sharma in the above noted Suit and I am well acquainted with
the facts and circumstances of this case.
8. That the statements made in paragraph 01 to 4 above are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld Court.

I sign this Affidavit on this the _______ day of

_________ 2024 at Rohini.

__________________________
Declarant
Identified by me
Advocate/Siliguri

Proposition 19:

1. The case revolves around a committed gay couple who have been in marriage. However,
when one of the spouses, hereafter referred to as "Mr. Z," attempted to designate his
husband, referred to as "Mr. Y," as the nominee for his assets and benefits, he encountered
discrimination based on his sexual orientation. The institution responsible for managing such
designations refused to acknowledge Mr. Y as a legitimate nominee solely because he is in a
same-sex marriage with Mr. X.
2. The fundamental issue in this case pertains to equal protection under the law. Discriminating
against Mr. X and Mr. Y on the basis of their sexual orientation violates their constitutional
right to equal protection, as established by the Constitution.
3. The couple realized this issue of is faced largely faced by their community and they being an
advocate in supreme court of Indian decided to fight a legal battel against it
4. On 14.8.2023 they filed an PIL seeking legal recognition of same sex marriage in the country
which would enable the community members to enjoy their legal and fundamental right
such adoption, divorce, maintenance etc.
5. Draft the said PIL.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA

W.P. (C) No. 456 OF 2023

Mr. X
-Petitioner
Mr. Y
-Petitioner

Vs.
UNION OF INDIA &ANR
Respodnt

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

The abovenamed Petitioners, Mr X and Mr Y, most

respectfully submit as follows:

1. That the petitioners are two individuals who

share a consensual adult relationship and are
married to one another.
2. That the petitioners enjoyed a safe and healthy
social life, however, were faced by constant
blockades caused by the inefficacy of the
prevailing laws.
3. On xx/xx/2022, the Petitioners were denied to
keep each other as nominees of their assets on
the grounds that they do not qualify as a
legitimate nominee.
 4. That the petitioners believe the Constitution of
India bestows the responsibility to treat every
citizen as equal under Article 14.
5. That the Petitioners firmly believes that the
inquality shown towards the LGBTQIA+
community is discriminative and violates Article
15 of the Constitution of India.

PRAYER:
It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue directives to:

a) Mandate stringent equality based standards and

protocols to be implemented in all institutions, both
public and private, across the country.

b) Formulate and enforce laws specifically aimed at

ensuring the safety and security of the LGBTQIA+
community.

c) Institute a committee to oversee and regulate the

implementation of equitable laws aimed towards
granting legal and fundamental rights to the community

And for such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and just in the
circumstances of the case.

The Petitioners prays for the indulgence of this Hon'ble Court and pledges to extend all
cooperation required in the interest of justice and public welfare.

COUNSEL FOR THE

PETITIONER
Advocate/Calcutta

DATED: ___________

Petitioner in Person
Proposition:

1. Ms. Priya Desai, a baker known for her delicious and creative cupcakes, runs a popular
bakery in Pune, Maharashtra.
2. She has built a loyal clientele who appreciate her high-quality ingredients and unique flavour
combinations.
3. During a local radio show “Aalo”, known for its celebrity gossip and outrageous commentary,
a radio host, RJ Harsh, made slanderous remarks about Ms. Desai's bakery. He called her
cupcakes "inedible" and claimed she uses "substandard ingredients" on 1/1/22.
4. RJ Harsh further alleged that Ms. Desai obtained her recipes through unethical means.
5. These comments were completely untrue and based on personal animosity between RJ
Harsh and Ms. Desai, who had previously refused to provide him with free cupcakes for a
promotional event.
6. Ms. Desai has numerous positive customer reviews and uses only the finest ingredients.
7. Fearing the damaging effect these comments have had on her business reputation, Ms. Desai
is considering filing a complaint of slander against RJ Harsh and the radio station.
8. The false accusations have caused a significant decline in customers and negative online
reviews. Ms. Desai believes this is a case of slander as the comments were spoken and
publicly broadcasted, causing harm to her business.
9. Draft the said defamation complaint by virtue of the principles embedded under Law of
Torts.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASSMAGISTRATE,

PUNE, C.C. NO. XX OF 20XX

Miss. Priya Desai, D/o. Prem Desai, Hindu, Baker, aged about 24 year residing in Pune

.……... Complainant

Mr. Harsh Kumar, S/o Ram Kumar, Hindu, Radio Jockey, aged about 26 years residing in Tirupati

.…….. Accused.

COMPLAINT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT

U/Sec 200 Cr. P.C.

(1) The complaint submits that she is a baker and she knew the accused purely as an artist.
(2) The complaint submits that the accused hosts a local radio show ‘AALO’ and its known for
the celebrity gossips
(3) The complaint submits that the accused, on 1/1/22, labelled her cupcakes as inedible and
also alleged that she stole recipes.
(4) The complaint submits that this has caused her insufferable loss considering that an indie
business runs on reviews until it builds a high brand value.
(5) The complaint submits that the accused’s statement consists of slanderous remarks and
requires immediate cognizance. Hence the complaint is being made directly.
 The complaint therefore prays that the honourable court may be pleased to take cognizance
of the offence U/sec 499 of Indian Penal Code and punish him according to law.

Xxxxxxxx Priya Desai

Advocate for complainant Complainant

Proposition:

1. Ms. Aisha Kapoor, a brilliant young journalist working for a prominent news channel in
Mumbai, Maharashtra, faced a challenging situation. Her supervisor, Mr. Rajeev Malhotra,
repeatedly made sexually suggestive comments and unwelcome advances. These
inappropriate actions created a hostile work environment for Ms. Kapoor.
2. Ms. Kapoor on 1/1/22, feeling harassed and uncomfortable, filed a formal complaint under
the POSH Act Act, 2013, with the company's Internal Complaints Committee. The ICC
conducted an investigation and concluded that Mr. Malhotra had indeed engaged in sexual
harassment.
3. The ICC recommended Mr. Malhotra's termination of employment as punishment. However,
the company challenged the ICC's decision, arguing the penalty was too harsh. The case
proceeded to the High Court.
4. In a controversial judgment, the High Court on 1/11/22, reduced the punishment for Mr.
Malhotra, downgrading it from termination to a temporary suspension. This decision
caused widespread outrage among women's rights groups and activists who viewed it as
lenient and insensitive to the seriousness of sexual harassment.
5. Disappointed and seeking justice, Ms. Kapoor, with the support of an NGO advocating for
women's rights, is considering filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) with the Supreme Court.

Draft the said SLP

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Order XVI Rule 4(1) (a)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL
LEAVE PETITION

(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India) S.L.P. (Civil)

No. ....................of2023.

BETWEEN

MS AISHA KAPOOR

PETITIONER.
Vs.
.

ABC NEWS
-
RESPONDENT
To
Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and His Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of
India.
The Special Leave Petition of the Petitioner most respectfully showeth :-

1. The Petitioner herein, Ms. Aisha Kapoor, is a

resident of Mumbai, Maharashtra, and a
brilliant young journalist who was employed
by the Respondent No. 2, [Name of News
Channel Company], a prominent news
channel in Mumbai.
2. That during her employment with
Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner faced a
hostile work environment due to repeated
instances of sexual harassment by her
supervisor, Mr. Rajeev Malhotra (not a party
to this petition). Mr. Malhotra engaged in
unwelcome advances and made sexually
suggestive comments towards the Petitioner,
creating a situation of discomfort and
distress.
3. On January 1, 2022, feeling harassed and
aggrieved, the Petitioner filed a formal
complaint under the Sexual Harassment of
Women at Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH
Act) with the company's Internal Complaints
Committee (ICC).
4. The ICC conducted a thorough investigation
and concluded, through its findings, that Mr.
Malhotra had indeed engaged in acts of
sexual harassment against the Petitioner, as
defined under the POSH Act.
5. Based on the investigation’s findings, the
ICC recommended the termination of Mr.
Malhotra's employment as a just punishment
for his actions.
6. However, the Respondent No. 2, [Name of
News Channel Company], challenged the
ICC's decision, arguing that the
recommended termination was an
excessively harsh penalty for Mr. Malhotra.
7. The matter was subsequently heard by the
High Court of [State name] on [Date]. In a
judgment passed on November 1, 2022, the
High Court delivered a controversial verdict.
The Court, in a surprising turn of events,
reduced Mr. Malhotra's punishment from
termination to a mere temporary suspension.
8. This decision by the High Court caused
widespread outrage among women's rights
groups and activists across the country. The
judgment was viewed as lenient and
insensitive to the seriousness of sexual
harassment, undermining the very purpose of
the POSH Act.
 9. Disappointed with the High Court's
judgment and seeking true justice, the
Petitioner, with the support of an NGO
advocating for women's rights, has decided
to approach this Hon'ble Court.
10. The Petitioner respectfully submits that the
High Court's judgment suffers from
significant legal flaws and misinterprets the
provisions of the POSH Act. The lenient
punishment awarded to Mr. Malhotra fails to
deter such misconduct in the future and
creates a message of impunity for
perpetrators of sexual harassment.
11. The substantial questions of law that arise
for consideration by this Hon'ble Court are
as follows:

(a) Whether the High Court erred in

judgment by reducing the punishment for Mr.
Malhotra's proven sexual harassment from
termination to a temporary suspension, thereby
undermining the legislative intent of the POSH
Act.

(b) Whether the High Court's decision

violates the Petitioner's fundamental right to a
safe and respectful work environment under
Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

12. The Petitioner strongly believes that the

High Court's judgment sets a dangerous
precedent and requires urgent intervention by
this Hon'ble Court.

13. In light of the above,

(a) It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant leave to appeal
against the judgment and order dated November 1, 2022, passed by the High Court of [State
name] in [Case Name and Number].
(b) Upon grant of leave, this Hon'ble Court be further pleased to allow this Special Leave
Petition and set aside the judgment of the High Court, upholding the ICC's recommendation
of terminating Mr. Malhotra's employment.

(c) This Hon'ble Court may pass such other order(s) as it deems fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.

VERIFICATION
Ms Aisha Kapoor do hereby verify that the statements made in paragraph 01 to 4 above are to the
best of my knowledge and belief and rest are my humble submission / prayer before the Ld. Court. I
sign this Verification on this the _____ day of _________ 2023 at Siliguri.

________________
Signature

AFFIDAVIT

MS AISHA KAPOOR solemnly affirm and say as follows:

5. That I am the MS AISHA KAPOOR in the

above noted Suit and I am well acquainted
with the facts and circumstances of this
case.
6. That the statements made in paragraph
above are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief and rest are my humble
submission / prayer before the Ld Court.

I sign this Affidavit on this the _______ day of

_________ 2023 at Mumbai.
__________________________
Declarant
Identified by me
Advocate/Mumbai

Proposition 10:

1. Ms. Priya Sharma, a resident of Chennai, Tamil Nadu, works as a teacher at a local
elementary school. She has a close relationship with her students and is attentive to their
 well-being. Recently, she noticed a significant change in the behavior of one of her students,
8-year-old Maya. Maya became withdrawn, displayed unusual anxiety, and had difficulty
focusing in class.
2. Concerned about Maya's emotional state, Ms. Sharma spoke with her privately in a safe and
supportive environment. During the conversation, Maya hesitantly revealed that the school
janitor, Mr. Ashok Kumar, had been inappropriately touching her on several occasions. These
actions involved inappropriate physical contact and comments that made Maya feel
uncomfortable and scared.
3. Ms. Sharma was deeply disturbed by Maya's disclosure. She ensured Maya felt safe and
believed. Understanding the seriousness of the situation, Ms. Sharma did not confront Mr.
Kumar directly.
4. To protect Maya and ensure justice, Ms. Sharma is considering filing a complaint under the
POCSO Act.
5. Draft the said complaint under the purview of POCSO Act.

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASSMAGISTRATE,

CHENNAI, C.C. NO. XX OF 20XX

Miss. Maya Sharma, D/o. Priya Sharma, Hindu, Student, aged about 8 year residing in Chennai

.……... Complainant

Mr. Ashok Kumar, S/o Ram Kumar, Hindu, aged about 26 years residing in Tirupati

.…….. Accused.

COMPLAINT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT

U/Sec 200 Cr. P.C.

(6) The complaint submits that she is studying in Class 2, IB School and she knew the accused
well.
(7) The complaint submits that the accused had been behind her for last 6months, but she
never cared him. He wrote a love letter to her and she did not understand anything
considering her age. The accused tried to lock her up with himself inside the female
washroom. This happened on 01.05.20XX.
(8) The complainant submits that on 12.05.20XX, she came to the school and had a conversation
with her teacher. She came out to her teacher and revealed everything that has been going
on.
(9) The complaint submits that, while she was being abused by the accused, she was told not to
share the happening of such event with anyone. The accused threatened her that he would
inflict hurt upon her and her mother.
(10)The complainant submits that her teacher assured to take actions against the accused.
Hence the complaint is being made directly.

The complaint therefore prays that the honourable court may be pleased to take cognizance
of the offence U/sec 12 of POCSO ACT, 2012 and punish him according to law.
 Xxxxxxxx Maya Sharma

Advocate for complainant Complainant

VERIFICATION

I, Maya Sharma, do hereby verify that the contents of paragraphs 1-5 of the above Complaint
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and the rest are submissions made
before this Hon'ble Court.

Petitioner in Person
Verified in Chennai , this the _______ day of ____________ 2023.

……………………….
Petitioner in Person