TEAM CODE-

1ST GLAMOCK
1ST INTRA INTRATRAIL
MOCKCOMPETETION,
TRIAL COMPETITION 2024
ILSR,GLAU

BEFORE
THE HON’BLE SESSIONS
COURT AT NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF

THE UNION TERRITORY OF NEW DELHI .....................................PROSECUTION

V.

KAREENA BAI..................................................................................................DEFENSE

FOR OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER

SECTIONS 302, 307 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION

PAGE | | 1
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF DEFENSE
 TABLE OF CONTENTTENT

TABLE OF CONTENT..................................................................................................2

INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS.....................................................................................3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES..........................................................................................4

 CASES CITED.............................................................................................4

 BOOKS REFERRED...................................................................................5

 STATUTES AND RULES...........................................................................5

 ARTICLES AND LEGAL JOURNALS...........................................................5

 LEGAL DATABASE...................................................................................5

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION...............................................................................6

STATEMENT OF FACTS................................................................................................7

STATEMENT OF CHARGES.........................................................................................9

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.....................................................................................10

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED..........................................................................................11

PRAYER............................................................................................................................20

PAGE | | 2 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

  AIR LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
All India Reporter

 IPC Indian Penal Code

 CRPC Criminal Procedural Code

 IEA Indian Evidence Act

 Hon’ble Honourable

 i.e., That is

 u/s Under Section

 J Justice

 v. Versus

 (A) Accused

 PW Prosecution Witness

 DW Defence Witness

 & And

 @ Alias

 Sec. Section

PAGE | | 3 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

CASES REFERRED:

 State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ahamadullah 1961 AIR 998 SCR(3)583

 State of Rajasthan vs. Shera Ram 2012 SCC 602
 Dayabhai Chagganbhai Thakker vs. State of Gujarat 1964 AIR 1563 SCR(7)361
 Rudul shah vs. State of Bihar 1983 AIR 1086 4 SCC 141
 Hari singh gond vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2008 AIR 2009 SCC 109
 Ratanlal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 1970 AIR 778 SCC(3) 533
 Bapu@ Gajraj Singh vs. State of Rajasthan 2007 AIR 1964 SCC 1563
 Mrs. Veena Sethi vs. State of Bihar 1982 SC 583
 Surendra Mishra vs. State of Jharkhand 2011 SCC 495
 Kishan Lal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
 Shrikant anandrao Bhosale vs. State of Maharashtra SCC 748

STATUTES AND RULES:

 INDIAN PENAL CODE(1860)

 CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL CODE(1973)
 INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT(1872)

PAGE | | 4 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 BOOKS REFERRED:
 KD Gaur,Textbook on Indian Penal Code(2020-21)
 Ratanlal & Dhirajlal,The Code of Criminal Procedure(23rd ed.,2020)
 KD Gaur, Textbook on The Indian Evidence Act (2nd ed.,2020-21)
 Lexis Nexis, Universal’s Criminal Manual (2023 reprint edition)
 Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and toxicology (22ed Edn)

LEGAL DATABASE:
 SCC Online
 Indian Kanoon

ARTICLES AND LEGAL JOURNALS:

 Choudhary Laxmi Narayan and Deep Shikha “Indian legal system and mental health”, Indian
journal of Psychiatry.2013 Jan ;55(suppl 2): S1177-S181
 “Schizophrenia” National Institute of Mental Health
 Vidhi Mahajan “Defence of Insanity under INDIAN PENAL CODE”, Legal Specs

PAGE | | 5 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Counsel representing the Prosecution have endorsed their pleadings before the Hon`ble
Sessions Court, New Delhi, under Section 209 1 read with 1772 of Code of criminal procedure
in which the Hon`ble Court has the jurisdiction. The present memorandum sets forth the
facts, contentions and arguments.

1
209. Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it. – When in a case instituted on a
police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate and it appears to the Magistrate that the
offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall-- (a) commit, after complying with the provisions of section 207
or section 208, as the case may be, the case to the Court of Session, and subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail,
remand the accused to custody until such commitment has been made; (b) subject to the provisions of this Code relating to
bail, remand the accused to custody during, and until the conclusion of, the trial; (c) send to that Court the record of the case
and the documents and articles, if any, which are to be produced in evidence; (d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the
commitment of the case to the Court of Session.
2
177. Ordinary place of inquiry and trial. – Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court
within whose local jurisdiction it was committed

PAGE | | 6 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Kareena bai is the second wife of the deceased Raesh Ram. She is ordinary house wife, and
was residing with his two children, namely, Sonia and Asha, whom was not liked by her
because both were the offspring of a first wife and kareena bai was not accepted properly as
a second wife or step mother as a result their used to be fights and quarrel every day in her
family over small matters. Kareena bai was fed up with the daily quarrels , and took this very
difficult decision and one day On 25.12.2022 Kareena bai attacked with intention and motive
on Raesh and Asha with the knife which she had bought few days ago over the family
quarrel. This act of Kareena resulted in the death of Raesh Ram on the very date of the
incident and death of Asha after one month of the incident. On 25.12.2022 Asha bleedingly
approached Diwan Kuai (the shopkeeper) and requested him to inform police that her father
has been killed by Kareena Bai (her stepmother)

An FIR was filed by Diwan Kuai, a shopkeeper at new friends colony, New Delhi (the Informant)
on 25.12.2022, wherein he stated that around 1:00 pm he heard a noise upon stepping
outside ,he witnessed a gathering of people in front of Z-173 .A person(Raesh) was lying
injured in the alley there was lot of blood.A girl(Asha) was sobbing near the body drenched in
blood. When he reached near her she said “uncle papa has been killed by my mother please call
the police”.

According to the public present at the scene ,there was a family dispute in house Z-13 New
friends colony resulting in the injury of the said person. Acting quickly he reported the
incident to the police.
While present at the scene he learned that the injured person was Raesh and his daughter Asha
The whole information was recorded and assigned to ASI Sudhanshu shankar who found
injured Asha and the dead body of Raesh lying on the road in the pool of blood and and on
interrogation found Kareena bai inside the house who admitted to kill his Husband and injured
Asha with a knife which wad found in another room. Dead body was sent for postmortem and
Asha was taken by PCR van. Kareena was sent for Medical examination where DR.DK Basu
(doctor of casualty ward) stated that Kareena bai seemed to have a paranoia regarding ghost and
Kareena bai claimed to hear voices and also that she takes medicines of anxiety for last 10 years.

Asha was declared dead on 24.01.2023 and the chargesheet was filed on 1.02.2023

PAGE | | 7 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 Now, the matter is before the learned trial court for cognizance, framing of charges and further
trial.

STATEMENT OF CHARGES

As per the FIR and chargesheet Mrs.Kareena Bain has been charged under:

Charge 1:- Section 302 of IPC, 1860 for Murder

Charge 2:- Section 307 of IPC, 1860 for Attempt to Murder

PAGE | | 8 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 SUMMARY OF ARGUEMENTS

ISSUE 1. WHETHER THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF MURDER AND ATTEMPT

TO MURDER U/S 302 AND 307 OF IPC 1860?

It is humbly submitted that the accused is guilty of murder and attempt to murder u/s 302 and
307 of IPC, 1860. The accused at the time of an offence did have motive, intention , planning
and the knowledge of the physical nature of the act which are the essential elements of
heinous crime of murder and attempt to murder.

ISSUE 2. WHETHER THE ACCUSED CAN TAKE THE DEFENCE OF INSANITY

U/S 84 IPC 1860?

It is humbly submitted that NO, the accused can not take defense of insanity u/s 84 of IPC
because there is no medical background and history of accused to prove that she is insane
and unsound mind conditions at the time of offence and from the circumstances of the case
kareena bai said that she was the patient of anxiety from 10 years and she was ailment of
schizophrenia. Accused kareena bai was medical insane not legal insane because at the time
of act she was in well conditions to take decision at the time of act and she was capable of
knowing the nature of the act .Thus the accused should not get the benefit of insanity under
section 84 of INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860.

PAGE | | 9 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1.

WHETHER THE ACCUSED IS GUILTY OF MURDER AND ATTEMPT TO MURDER U/S

302 AND 307 OF IPC, 1860?

1. It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the Accused is guilty of murder and
attempt to murder u/s 302 and 307 of IPC 1860.The section talks about the murder and
attempt to murder.

1.1 Sec. 302.Punishment for Murder :- “Whoever commits murder shall be punished with
death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine”.1

1.2 Essentials for Murder

 Causing death-:act done by the accused must result in the death of a person
 Bodily injury-:the act done by the individual should be done to cause bodily injury
 Motive, intention or Knowledge -:the act done with knowledge of causing death of a
person

1.3 Sec.307.Attempt to Murder-: Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and
under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall
be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years,
and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall
be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. 2

1 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2 Indian Penal Code, 1860

PAGE | | 10 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 1.4 It is humbly submitted to this honorable court that the accused is guilty of murder as well as
attempt to murder as in the instant case because there is the motive ,intention, planning and
knowledge which are the very important elements of crime such as murder. The accused was
having intention motive , planning and knowledge at the time of incident .

1.5 In Abdul Wahid vs. State of UP 1980

Intent which is a state of mind can never be precisely proved by direct evidence as a fact: it can
only be deduced or inferred from other facts. Some relevant considerations are :(1) the nature of
weapon used; (2) the place where injuries were inflicted; (3) the nature of the injury
caused; . The Court has to see is, whether the act irrespective of its result, was done with
the intention or knowledge and under circumstances mentioned in that Section. The intention or
knowledge of the accused must be such as is necessary to constitute murder. Therefore,
the intention is to be gathered from all the circumstances, and not merely from the consequences
that ensue.

1.6 In the similar case of “STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. AHMADULLAH”3 the accused was
held liable despite the mental illness(epilepsy) he had and the liability of the accused was
decided on the basis of certain factors like -uncertainty of unsoundness of mind at the time of
committing the crime (legal insanity)and the manner in which the crime was committed by the
accused. In the case mentioned above the accused committed the crime with well planning and
execution which only a person of sound mind could do. It was held that despite the mental illness
of the accused the legal insanity was not proved and also the manner in which the crime
committed proves that the accused was not having any epileptic seizure and had the full
knowledge of his act therefore the accused will be held liable for murdr.

1.7 If we take the same factors in the instant case then it would be totally valid to say that the
accused was insane at the time of incidence because the quarrel which resulted in death of Raesh
ram and Asha was because of the accused seeing ghost and hearing voices as stated by the
accused herself which proves that she was in delusion at the time of incident and the motive to
kill was very weak as (deceased)Asha also stated that there was no quarrel in house on
25.12.2022 thus no requisite mens rea was present. Secondly the manner in which the accused
committed the crime was so random and not well planned and executed as the dead body of
Raesh was lying on the road in the broad daylight and there was no attempt to hide or run away
from the accused side also when interrogated by the police she admitted killing Raesh and
hurting asha. Often it is seen that a person who commits crime does not admit it and why would a
person admit doing an act which can result in serious consequences like lifetime imprisonment or
fine. She admitted because she did not knew the seriousness of the act that she did.

1.8 Criminal Act done by the person of unsound mind during the incident does not amount to murder
or attempt to murder hence the charges framed against the accused are inappropriate.

PAGE | | 11 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 3. State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ahamadullah 1961 AIR 998 SCR(3)583

PAGE | | 12 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 ISSUE 2

WHETHER THE ACCUSED CAN GET DEFENCE U/S 84 IPC 1860?

4. Insanity: Section 84 of IPC-: “nothing is an offence, which is done by a person who , at the
time of doing it by reason of unsoundness of mind is incapable of knowing the nature of the
act or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law4”

2.1 It is humbly submitted to the honorable court that yes the accused can take the defence of
insanity u/s 84 of IPC 1860 as in order to establish the defence of section 84 the legal insanity
must be proved instead of medical insanity which is fulfilled in the instant case taking into
account the oral, circumstantial evidences and the conduct before and after the incident.

2.2 The medical problem that has been observed and stated by DR.DK Basu who medically
examined her after the incident and also claimed by the accused herself is paranoia regarding
ghost and hearing voices which in medical terms is known as “schizophrenia”. According to the
article of National Institute of Mental Health , Schizophrenia is a serious mental illness that
affects how a person thinks ,feels and behaves and people suffering from schizophrenia often
lose touch with reality which can be distressing for them and their family.

The common symptoms shown by the people having schizophrenia are-:

 Hallucination
 Thought disorder
 Movement disorder
 Delusions
 Risk of violence

2.3 According to the Modi medical jurisprudence and toxology it's is explained what is paranoid
schizophrenia when it starts, what are its characteristics and dangers flowing from this ailment.
Paranoid schizophrenia, in the vast majority of cases, starts in the fourth decade and develops
insidiously. Suspiciousness is the characteristic symptom of the early stage. Ideas of reference
occur, which gradually develops into delusions of persecution. Auditory hallucinations follow,
which in the beginning, start as sounds or noises in the ears, but are afterwards changes into
abuses or insults. Delusions are at first indefinite, but gradually they become fixed and definite,
to lead the patient to believe that he is persecuted by some unknown person or some superhuman
agency. He believes that his food is being poisoned, some noxious gases are blown into his
room, and people are plotting against him to ruin him. Disturbances of general sensation gives
rise to hallucinations, which are attributed to the effects of hypnotism, electricity wireless
telegraphy or atomic agencies. The patient gets very irritated and excited owing to these painful
and disagreeable hallucinations and delusions. Since so many people are against him and are
interested in his ruin, he comes to believe that he must be a very important man.

4 Indian Penal Code 1860

PAGE | | 13 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 The nature of delusions thus may change from prosecutory to the grandiose type. He entertains
delusions of grandeur, power and wealth, and generally conducts himself in a haughty and overbearing
manner. The patient usually retains his money and orientation and does not show signs of insanity, until
the conversations is directed to the particular type of delusion from which he is suffering. When
delusions affect his behaviour, he is often a source of danger to himself and to others. [Modi's Medical
Jurisprudence and Toxicology (22nd Edn.)] Further, according to Modi, the cause of schizophrenia is
still not known but hereditary plays a part. The irritation and excitement are effects of illness. On
delusion affecting behaviour of patient, he is source of danger to himself and to others

2.4 The conduct of the accused before the incidence which was about the quarrel that happened over
the food being stolen by the ex wife of Raesh ram resulting to which accused killed raesh ram
and the conduct after the happening of the incident where accused admitted commiting the crime
without giving false statements and concealing the facts which is not often done by a person of
sound mind. Both conduct before the incident and after the incident itself supports the theory of
unsoundness necessary for getting defence u/s 84. The whole incident was very spontaneous and
not well planned and executed like a sound minded person would do.

2.5 In the similar case of SHRIKANT ANANDRAO BHOSALE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA5
which is almost identical to the instant case it was held that “the mere fact that the appellant did
not make any attempt to run away or that he committed the crime in day light and did not try to
hide it or that motive to kill his was very weak, would not indicate that at the time of commission
of the act the appellant was suffering from unsoundness of mind or he did not have requisite
mens rea for the commission of the offence. It is correct that these facts itself would not indicate
insanit

2.5.1 . In the present case, however, it is not only the aforesaid facts but it is the totality of the
circumstances seen in the light of the evidence on record to prove that the appellant was
suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. The unsoundness of relevant time. He was under
an attack of the ailment mind before and after incident is a relevant fact. From the
circumstances of the case clearly an inference can be reasonably drawn that the
appellant was under a delusion at the time of the incident There is a reasonable doubt
that at the time of commission of the crime, the appellant was incapable of knowing the
nature of the act by reason of unsoundness of mind and, thus, he is entitled to the benefit
of Section 84 IPC. Hence, the conviction and sentence of the appellant cannot be
sustained.”

2.6 Thus from the case referred above and the evidences collected it can be concluded that the act
done by the accused was without knowledge ,motive and intention and the defence of insanity
can be established. therefore, the accused should be acquitted from the charges that has been
framed against her

PAGE | | 14 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION

 5 Shrikant anandrao Bhosale vs. State of Maharashtra SCC 748

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, IN THE LIGHT OF FACTS OF THE CASE, ISSUES RAISED,

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED, AUTHORITIES CITED, THIS HON’BLE COURT
MAY BE PLEASED TO:

1. Acquit Mrs.Kareena Bai under the offences of sec. 302,307 of Indian Penal Code,
1860; OR
2. Pass any other order that it may deem fit in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good
Conscience.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE RESPONDENT AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL
EVER PRAY.

Place: New Delhi

Date: 5.02.2023

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY

COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENSE

PAGE | | 15 MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION