N.B.T.

LAW
COLLEGE MOOT
COURT CASE2
ACADEMIC YEAR 2019–2020

STUDENT ADVOCATE
Hapse Pallavi J
LLB-III FOR:
APPELANTS

Presented Before
Prof.Sandhya
Gadakh
 IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.237 OF2020
(Arising Out of S.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREMCHANDSINGH ….APPELANTS

Versus

THESTATEOFUTTARPRADESH
ANDANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

INTHEMATTEROF
PETITTION FOR APPEAL AGAINST JUDGEMENTS AND ORDER PASSED BY4th
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,GONDA(U.P.)
INDEX

1 CoverPage 1

2 ListofAbbreviations 3

3 Status&BooksReffered 4

4 Provisions&Sections 5

5 Vakalatnama 6

6 StatementofJurisdiction 7

7 StatementofFact 8

8 Issues 9

9 StatementofArguments 10

10 Prayer 13

11 Affidavit 14

12 Verification 15
LISTOFABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS FULLFORMS

HC HighCourt

SC SupremeCourt

Govt. Government

AIR All IndiaReporter

Hon'ble Honourable

SLP SpecialLeavePetition
STATUS AND BOOK S

REFFE

0 RRED

1. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

2. Indian Penal Code, 1860
3. Constitution of India
4. Supreme Court Reference

WEB SITES REFFERRED

1. www.google.com
2. www.Indiakanoon.com
3. www.lawyerclubindia.com
4. www.bar&bench.com
5. www.legallaid.com
6. www.livelaw.com
7. www.lawctopus.com

CASES REFFERED
1. Inder Mohan Goswami & Another VS State Of Uttaranchal &Ors
2. Sheila Sebastion v/s R.Javaharaj
3. M/S Pan Resorts Limited vs H.H.Marthanda Varma
4. Lalita Kumari vs Govt of Uttar Pradesh
PROVISIONS AND SECTIONS

 Section156 (3)of Criminal Procedure Code,1973

Magistrate to direct the end police to conduct investigation was only in respect of acognizable
offense.It is in cumbents for the police to register an FIR if the complaint relates to the
commission of acognizable offense.
 Section 300 of Criminal Procedure Code,1973
Person once convicted or acquitted not to be tried for same offense.while the acquittal remain
inforce, be charge with the ftasa servant,or upon the same facts with theft simply,or with
criminal breach of trust.
 Section 419 of Criminal Procedure Code,1973
Punishment for cheating by personation–whoever cheats by personation shall be punished.
 Section420ofCriminal ProcedureCode,1973
Warrant with whom to belodged–When the prisoe to be confined na jai l,the warrant shall belodged with
theJailor.

 Section 419 of Indian Penal Code 1860 Punishment for cheating by personation
Section420ofIndianPenalCode1860
Cheating and dishonesty including delivery of property

 Section467Indian Penal Code1860 Forgery of valuable will

 Section468 of Indian Pena lCode1860

Forgery for purpose of cheating–punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
 Section 471 of Indian Penal Code1860
Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document or electronic
record which he knows or has reasonto believe to beaforged document or electronic
record,shall be punished in the same manneras if he had forged such document or
electronic record.
Opposed to public policy.
 VAKALATNAMA
IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF
INDIA CRIMINAL APPELATE
JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
237 OF 2020

(Arising Out of S.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREMCHAND SINGH ….APPELANTS

Versus
THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
AND ANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

Me the Appellant do here by appointa student Adv.Chhaya Bhaskar Nisal on record

of hon’ble supreme court of India to appear for me in the above writ petitionto
conduct the proceeding on my behalf that may be taken in respect of any
application connected there with in any decre or judgment or any order passed
there in including the proceeding for review to be filled or to obtain return receive
document and to try deposit and receive money on my behalf in the said petition
we ready to rectify all the acts done by the aforesaid student advocate in the
presence of this authority and sign shere under.
ACCEPTED ON: / /2020
PLACE – NEW DELHI
Sd/-

APPELLANTS(PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

CHHAYA B. NISAL
(STUDENTADVOCATE)
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

Appellate Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeal from

high court is regard to criminal matter.

1) An appeal shall lie to the supreme court from any judgment

decree of Final order in a criminal proceeding of a High court
in the territory of India if the High court has on appeal
reversedan order of acquittal of anaccused person and
sentenced him to death;or has with drawn for trial be fore it
self any case from any court subordinate toits authority and has
in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him
to death ; or certifies under Article134A that the case is a fit
one for appeal ot he supreme court .

2) Provided that an appeal under sub-clause shall lie subject to

such provision as may be made in that be half under clause(1)
of Article145 to such conditions as the High Court may establish
or require.

3) Parliament may by law confer on the supreme court any further

power to entertain and he are appeals from any Judgment,
final order or sentences in a criminal proceeding of a High
court in the territory of India subject to such condition and
limitations as may be specified in such law.
STATEMENT OFF ACT
1) In this case the respondent has given general power of attorney to the
Appellant on 02.05.1985.On the basis to sold certain lands belonging gthe
Respondent.
2) One of the respondent Lodged FIRNo.160 of 1989on 14.09.1989that never
executed any general power of attorney in favoure of the Appellant.
Appellant for general power of attorney to sell his land illegally.
3) The Trial court acquitted the appellant as the charge could not be
established. On the basis that no record s are not available.
4) The respondent then filed civil suit No.353 of 2007 to cancel the general
power of attorney.The Respondent filed an application u/s156(3)criminal
procedure code.
5) This application was forwarded by the court to police leading to registration
.Alleging that the appellant thad forged general power of attorney and sold
lands of respondent, still earlier also sold.
6) As per the responses of civil suit No.353 of 2007. The appellant filed an
application for discharge. For referring to his acquittal, stating that he could
not be tried for same offence twice.
7) Revision against the same was dismissed on behalf of appellant can more
appropriately be urged at the time of framing the charge.
8) Submitted that theorder of acquittal and the cancellation of general power of
is not in dispute.
9) First and second FIR are refers for the general power of attorney comp
aratively executed offer long year.Therefore, it is a complete abuse of the
process of law and the proceeding are fit to bequashed.
10) Appealing the Highcourt has declined interference .On the basis
that ingredients of the two FIR were different.
11) The High court discharge application was rightly rejected and
interference declined in revision.
12) Supreme court Justify that,the Judgment may not have been
made available is therefore inconsequential and respondent demanding
the cancellation of the general power of attorney after acquittal of the
appellant.
13) The appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated
01.03.2017 are set aside.
ISSUES

1) Whether the power of attorney executed by the respondent or

not?

2) Whether the person once convicted or acquitted not betried for

same offence?

3) Whether the power of attorney is legal or forged?

4) Whether the civil court have power to entertain the application

filed for lodging FIR?
 STATEMENTOFARGUMENTS
I request sincerely that following should be kindly taken care of my
contention that can be argued in the present case is that appellant
denied all the adverse allegation levied by the respondent against him.
ISSUENO1
1)Whether the power of attorney executed by the respondent or not?
Onbehalf of the appellant side I am student advocate ChhayaB.Nisal
respectfully submits:-
Your honor the general power of attorney is executed by the
respondent. It is mentioned that the general power of attorney dated
02.05.1985 executed by respondent no. 2.The respondent has executed
the power of attorney in front of two witnesses which are SushilKumar
and Arvind . These are the two witnesses are mentioned in the
pursuance.
This power of attorney is signed by the respondent and sign not
denied by the respondent. Hence it is presume that the power of
attorney is executed by the respondent.
CASELAW
INDER MOHAN GOSWAMI &ANOTHER VS STATE OF UTTARAN
CHAL& ORS
SupremecourtofIndiaon9thOctober2007
PresidentMohanlalsharmaexecutedageneralpowerofattorneyon13.12.1996
infavourofrespondent.Bighaswastransferredbyexecutingageneralpowerof
attorneydated13.12.1996infavorofrespondent.
InthiscasegeneralpowerofattorneyexecutedbyLateMohanlalSharma
presidentofthesabhahadceasedtobeineffectafterhisdeath.Sothepowerof attorney
is given to the respondent in the name of his son Sureh Ahuja. The respondent
earnest money had been forfeited. All of this was only done after
appellantshadgiven respondentdue notice.
ISSUENO2
2.Whetherthepersononceconvictedoracquittednotbetriedforsame
offence?
OnbehalfoftheappellantsideIamstudentadvocateChhayaB.Nisal respectfully
submits:-
Whenpersononceconvictedoracquittednotbetriedforsameoffence.
Asperthesection300ofthecr.p.c.providedthat,personwhohasonce been
tried by a court of competent Jurisdiction for an offence and convicted
or acquitted of such offence shall while such conviction or
acquittalremainsinforce,notbeliabletobetriedagainforthesame
offence,noronthesamefactforanyotheroffenceforwhichadifferent
chargefromtheonemadeagainsthimmighthavebeenmadeundersub –
section(1)ofsection221orforwhichhemighthavebeenconvicted under
sub-section (2) thereof.
CASELAW
SHEILASEBASTIONV/SR.JAWAHARAJ
SupremeCourtofIndiaon11thMay2018
Inthiscasethecomplainantallegesthataccusedwasconvictedunder
section 465 IPC and was the offence of forgery making of a false
documentisessential.Ontheallegedforgedpowerofattorneydonot match
with that document.
Supreme Court was held that we find no reason to interfere with the
orderpassedbytheHighCourt.Appealsstanddismissedbeingdevoid
ofmerits.Asmentionedinthiscasethepersononceconvictedcannot be
tried for same offence.
ISSUENO3
2.Whetherthepowerofattorneyislegalorforged?
OnbehalfoftheappellantsideIamstudentadvocateChhayaB.Nisal
respectfully submits:-
Yourhonorthegeneralpowerofattorneywhetherlegalorforgeditis
disputed. The appellant is filed in the application in front of JMFC but
JMFCrejectedtheapplication.JMFCalsohavenorighttodeterminethe
legalityofthegeneralpowerofattorney.Thesuitisfileinthecivilcourt
bytherespondentbutcivilcourthasnotgivenjudgmentstill.Though
civilcourthavetherighttodecidethelegality.Butstillthesuit ispending in
front of civil court.
CASELAW
M/SPanResortsLimitedvsH.H.MarthandaVarma
Madras High Courton 30thOctober 2014
Inthiscasepetitionerusingthesaidfraudulentandforgedpowerofattorney and
colluding with the respondent. There is no confirmation about the
GeneralPowerofattorney.Whetheritislegalorforged.Suitisfiledinthe
civilcourtbytherespondentbutcivilcourthasnotgivenjudgment.
Atthetimeofpronouncingthejudgmenttheitwasinformedbythelearned
counselappearingforthefirstrespondentpassedawayandifthatbeingso any
observation finding given against him in this order will hold good for other
contemnors.
ISSUENO4

1) Whetherthecivilcourthavepowertoentertaintheapplicationfiledfor
lodging FIR ?

OnbehalfoftheappellantsideIamstudentadvocateChhayaB.Nisal
respectfully submits:-
Yourhonorasperthecivilcourthavenopowertoentertainthe
applicationfiledforlodgingFIR.AFIRistheveryfirststepinthecriminal
matterinwhichthefactsofthecommissionofcrimesisreportedtothe
policebythepersonwhoisawitnesstothecase,victimorapersonwho has
knowledge of the same act done by the accused. Under normal
circumstancesFIRcannotberegisteredaboutanycivildisputebecause
section 154 of criminal procedure code. Under which the FIR is
registeredclearly say thatpoliceareboundtoregisteracomplaintabout a
cognizable offence.
CASELAW
LalitaKumarivsGovtofUttarPradesh2014
2 SCC 1

Inthiscaseitismentionedthatinacivilmatteracontemptpetitioncan
befiledbeforetheHighcourtagainsttheofficerwhorefusedtolodge an FIR
Hon’ble Supreme Court.
CourtwasheldthatthepolicemustregisteredFIRwherethecomplaint dis
closes a cognizable offence.
PRAYER

Inthepremises,theappellanthumblypraysthatlightoftheissuesraised
,argumentsadvancedandauthoritiescited,theHon’bleSupremeCourt
thatitmaygraciouslypleasedtohold,adjudgeandadvance–
1) Toentitletheappellantstoquash theFIRasperthesuitable
adjugesment.
2) Toentitletheappellantsasperthemattershouldbeacquittedtothe
appellant from the respondent.
3) Any other order, declarationof relief thatmay be deemedfit in the
bestinterestofjustice,fairness,equity,andgoodconscience;
Asfortheacts,theappellantsshallforeverbeobliged.

Accepted On- / /2020

Place –New Delhi

Sd/-

APPELLANTS(PREM CHANDSINGH)

Sd/-

CHHAYA B. NISAL
(STUDENTADVOCATE)
 AFFIDAVIT
INTHEHON’BLESUPREMECOURTOFINDIACRI
MINALAPPELATEJURISDICTION
CRIMINALAPPEALNO.237OF2020
(ArisingOutofS.L.P.(Crl)No.4592Of2017)

PREMCHANDSINGH

….APPELANTS
Versus
THESTATEOFUTTARPRADESH
ANDANOTHER ….RESPONDENT

We , Prem Chand Singh and Others , the appellants of solemn

affirmationstatetothebestofourknowledge,beliefandinformation
inwitnessthereforethatthecontentsofthisappealaretruetothebest
ofmyknowledgeandhencewesignhereunder
AcceptedOn-/ /2020
Place –New Delhi

Sd/-

APPELLANTS(PREM CHANDSINGH)
Sd/-

CHHAYA B. NISAL
(STUDENTADVOCATE)
 VERIFICATION

I , Counsel on behalf of Prem Chand Singh( Appellants ) , do hereby

stateonsolemnaffirmationthatabovecontentsaretrueandcorrectto
thebestofmyknowledgeandbeliefandhencelsignhereunder

Accepted On – / /2020
Place – New Delhi
Sd/-

APPELLANTS(PREM CHANDSINGH)
Sd/-

CHHAYA B. NISAL
(STUDENTADVOCATE)