THE K.K.

LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

TEAM CODE: XXX

THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF OZALA

IN THE MATTER UNDER

ARTICLE 136(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF OZALA

Between

MS. QUANTISA … Petitioner

v/s
UNION OF OZALA … Respondent 1
STATE OF ASPAR … Respondent 2

WRIT PETITION NO. _________ OF 2021

WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE

RESPONDENT

I
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE RESPONDENT HAS SUBMITTED TO THE JURISDICTION OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF

OZALA UNDER UNDER ARTICLE 136(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF OZALA BY WAY OF SPECIAL
LEAVE.

The relevant portion of Art. 136(1) reads as follows:

“136(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion,
grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in
any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India.”

II
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Ozala is a developing country with a large area, distinct topography and huge population
density of 1500 persons per sq. km. Its population is primarily concentrated in the seven eastern
states popularly known as the seven sisters. The State of Aspar is the easternmost state of the
country and happens to share the largest territorial border with Yada.

2. Maximum population in Ozala belongs to the Gamus tribe, followed by Lopasis and people
who do not identify with either of the tribes.

3. Following the outbreak of COVID-19/Coronavirus pandemic, Yada was one of the first
countries to be affected. The authoritarian government of Yada suppressed media reportage and
continued its international affairs including air travel as usual, while other countries that
reported the spread of COVID-19 took immediate actions on regulation of travel and
compulsory thermal scanning at airports after arrival from an international destination.

4. 2020: Like any other responsible country, Ozala took prompt measures and started thermal
screening at its airports from 10th March when it only had 15 cases. From 12th March, incoming
flights from certain affected countries with more than 2000 cases were stopped which did not
include Yada, since it had officially declared only 60 cases.

5.The Government of Aspar issued the ‘Aspar Epidemic Diseases COVID 19 Regulations, 2020’
on 13th March 2020 which defined “Epidemic Diseases” as COVID-19 and prohibited all
gatherings of more than 15 persons in the State. On the same day, Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 was amended and Section 439A was introduced.

6. On 13th March, four persons from Yada including Ms. Quantisa, who is believed to be the
reincarnation of the founder of the sect, arrived in Aspar from Yada for the annual congregation
at the Great Temple of Aspar. The congregation on 14th March was witnessed by 58 visitors
from the seven sisters as well as the police.

7. During the ceremony, Ms. Quantisa was seated on the stage and lambasted those who thought
she might be suffering from COVID-19, since it was common knowledge that she practised
Cosmic meditation. She made the attendees drink ‘holy water’ from her hands after telling them
about its immunity boosting properties against all diseases, which was readily accepted as they
considered her to be a credible source of information owing to her graduation degree in science.

III
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

8. On 16th March, Ms. Quantisa was urgently hospitalized since she developed high fever and
started facing breathing problems while the other three persons returned to Yada. Ms. Quantisa
ultimately tested positive for COVID-19.

9. The government traced all the attendees of the congregation by 20th March. All the attendees
and several police officers deployed at the event tested positive for COVID-19. Though there
were no deaths amongst them, two of the attendees (both aged above 80 years) were critically
ill and required ventilator support.

10. At the behest of certain Gamus politicians, First Information Report was registered against
Ms. Quantisa under Ss. 188, 270, 308 and 325 of the Ozalan Penal Code,1870 read with section
3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act,1897 on 22nd March, 2020. She was arrested from the hospital
on the same day and she fully recovered within a week. Investigations revealed that Ms.
Quantisa had received a message confirming that she had tested positive for COVID-19 on 14
March 2020, immediately after the ceremony, but she did not inform anyone regarding this
message.

11. Upon conclusion of investigation, a Chargesheet/ Final Report came to be filed on 26 April,
2020. Since the normal functioning of the trial courts has been suspended due to the pandemic,
charges have not been framed in the matter and trial could not commence.

12. On 10 May, 2020 Ms. Quantisa filed a bail application before the High Court of Aspar inter
alia arguing that bail is the rule and jail is the exception. She undertook to surrender her passport
and reside at the Great Temple of Aspar until the conclusion of her trial to allay apprehensions
of her fleeing. The High Court rejected the application by placing reliance on Section 439A of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. The HC noted that she was accused of a heinous offence and
did not have reasonable grounds to believe that she was not likely to commit an offence while
on bail. Ms. Quantisa has now challenged the rejection of her bail before the Supreme Court.

13. She has also filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court challenging the
constitutionality of Section 439A on the grounds that burden of proof cannot keep an innocent
person in indefinite custody and it would be impossible to establish their innocence before they
were given an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or lead defence evidence.

IV
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

CONTENTION 1 - It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the petitioner is not

entitled to be released on bail since she has committed a heinous offence and has acted

malignantly in spreading the highly infectious virus in the citizens of Ozala by concealment of

facts regarding her disease. Moreover, there are no reasonable grounds for believing that she

is not likely to commit an offence while on bail.

V
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

CONTENTION 1: THAT THE PETITIONER IS NOT ENTITLED TO BE RELEASED

ON BAIL.

1. It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the petitioner, Ms. Quantisa is not
entitled to be released on bail.
1.1 THAT THE PETITIONER HAS ACTED MALIGNANTLY

2. The Petitioner was apprised well before by the officials in Yada about cancelling her visit
to Ozala since she showed flu-like symptoms. She agreed to be tested for COVID-19 but
took anti-pyretic drugs before taking a flight for Aspar so as to conceal her symptoms from
the authorities in Aspar and eventually cleared thermal screening performed at the airport.

3. She further took the devoted attendees in confidence and made them drink ‘holy water’
from her hands convincing them about its immunity bolstering powers, fully aware that she
might risk the lives of many.

4. Investigations have unearthed that Ms. Quantisa was cognizant of her test reports that
clearly revealed that she had been infected by the virus and this message was received by
her immediately after the ceremony, yet she did not inform anyone about the same.

5. The said acts of the petitioner imperilled the lives of the attendees as well as the police staff
present in the ceremony. Two of the attendees happened to be critically ill and required
ventilator support.

6. The aforementioned facts evidently signify the petitioner is guilty under Ss. 270, 308 and
325 of the Ozalan Penal Code, 1870 dealing with malignant act likely to spread infection of
diseases dangerous to life, attempt to commit culpable homicide and punishment for
voluntarily causing grievous hurt respectively.

1
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

1.2 THAT THE PETITIONER HAS VIOLATED SECTION 3 OF EPIDEMICS DISEASES ACT, 1897.

7. Section 3 of the Act clearly mandates that, “any person disobeying any regulation or order
made under this Act shall be deemed to have committed an offence punishable under section
188 of the Indian Penal Code.” The provision directs to the penal provisions given under
Section 188 which deals with disobedience of an order and mandates that “if such
disobedience causes or trends to cause danger to human life, health or safety, or causes or
tends to cause a not or affray, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for
a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand
rupees, or with both”.

8. The petitioner had taken all the permissions prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic
and did not conform to the rules in place in Aspar.

1.3 THAT THE PETITIONER DOES NOT FULFIL THE TWIN CONDITIONS OF BAIL

9. The twin conditions of bail as laid down by Section 439A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 are:

a) reasonable grounds for believing that a person is not guilty of an offence.

b) the person is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

10. In the landmark case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand1, it was observed by the court that
“The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except when there are
circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or
creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses.”

11. In the instant case, there are no sufficient reasons for believing that the petitioner is not
guilty as specified by the High Court as well and owing to her public stature and active
presence on social media, it cannot be ascertained whether the petitioner would not
commit any offence while on bail.

1
State of Rajasthan, Jaipur v. Balchand @ Baliay AIR 1977 SC 2447.
2
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
 THE K.K. LUTHRA MEMORIAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2021

PRAYER

In the light of the facts stated, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited,
the counsel on behalf of the respondent humbly prays before the Hon’ble Supreme Court
to kindly adjudge and declare,

I. The petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

Or to pass any appropriate relief that the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and is in the best
interest of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience.

And for this act of kindness, the counsel on behalf of the respondent, as in duty bound
shall forever pray.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

__________________________________

Sd/-

VI
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT