Professional Documents
Culture Documents
th
IN THE WORLD
COURT OF JUSTICE
INVITED
SUCCESSION
-BETWEEN-
STATE OF VADERTHAM
APPLICANT
VS.
STATE
OF
KYLOSIA
RESPONDENT
0|Page
TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S
LIST
OF
ABBRIVIATIONS
INDEX OF
AUTHORITIES
STATEMENT OF
JURISDICTION.
SYNOPSIS OF FACTS............................................................
STATEMENT OF ISSUES.......................................................
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.................................................
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED.....................................................
PRAYER...............................................................................
1|Page
L I S T O F A B R I V I AT I O N S
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
SC : Supreme court
HC : High Court
u/s. : Under section
r/.w. : read with
IPC : Indian Penal Code
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
CASES REFERRED
BOOKS REFERRED
KELSON
2|Page
SHAW, MALCOM.N.
DICTIONARY
Blacks Law Dictionary, Revised 4th Edition( St. Paul MINN. West Publishing Company,
1968)
INTERNET RESOURCES
http://www.indiankanoon .com
http://www.lawnotes.in
http://www.case diary.com
http://www.ipc.com
http://www.google.co.in
http://www.wikipedia.co
3|Page
S TAT E M E N T O F J U R I S D I C T I O N
The appellant has approached the Honarable Supreme court of India under Article 132
ans 134 of Constitution of India 1950. The case is listed for arguments before the division
bench of the Honble Supreme Court.
Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in certain cases
( 1 ) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order of
a High Court in the territory of India, whether in a civil, criminal or other proceeding, if
the High Court certifies under Article 134A that the case involves a substantial question
of law as t the interpretation of this Constitution
(2) Omitted
(3) Where such a certificate is given, any party in the case may appeal to the Supreme
Court on the ground that any such question as aforesaid has been wrongly decided
Explanation For the purposes of this article, the expression final order includes an order
declaring an issue which, if decided in favour of the appellant, would be sufficient for the
final disposal of the case
4|Page
(2) Parliament may by law confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to entertain and
hear appeals from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High
Court in the territory of India subject to such conditions and limitations as may be specified
in such law
S Y N O P S I S O F FA C T S
1. Meera an 18 year old girl studying In class 12th used to take Maths tuitions from Rahul.
5|Page
2. Rahul Accused no.1 techer of Meera developed emotions for Meera was unaware of his
feelings.
3. On 14th Feburary Rahul proposed Meeras and on 20th Feb .2016 he approached her
parents regarding the same , as Meeras did not replied to his proposal ans wanted him to
talk on this matter to her parents directly.
4. Meeras Parents rejected his offer and warned him not to contact her anymore. There after
she started avoiding Rahul.
5. Once Meera also made it very clear to Rahul that she would not go against the wishes of
her parent and asked him not to follow her.Despite he continued following her and
personally contacted her on phones and internet. Meera reported the same to her parents.
6. Once Rahul tried to convince her parents about his feelings and further asted that he
wanted to marry her on which her parents rebuked and asked him to leave.
7. Rahul enraged with the feeling of rejection went to Sanjay aged 45 and narrated the
whole thing. Sanjay always treated Rahul as his son.
8. Sanjay suggested Rahul to find Meera alone and take her to the temple for marrying her
and suggested. In case Meera after any resistance, he will threaten her with the bottle of
acid to pressurize her to come with them to the temple, to which Rahul agreed.
9. On 23rd March as per plan finding Meera passing on a lonely road Rahul and Sanjay got
out of the car and rahul approached her and asked her to come with him to the temple to
marry him but she refused, on which Sanjay carrying the bottle of acid , threatened
Meera.
10. Rahul start dragging Meera ito the car, due to which Meera started shouting loudly, To
teach a lesson to Meera sanjay threw the acid on her face and then both Rahul and Sanjay
fled away leaving Meera in immense pain.
11. FIR was lodged, Statement of Meera was recorded. A case was registered against both the
accused u/s 326 A r/w section 34 IPC. Rahul was also charged u/s 354 D. Sanjay
absconding and declared proclaimed offender while Rahul wa arrested by police and
bottle of acid and car was seized from his possession.
12. After investigation and triel before Sessions Court Rahul was formed guilty and the court,
convicted Rahul u/s 326 A r/w section 34 and sentenced him 10 years of rigorous
imprisonment. He was also asked to pay compensation to meera of Rs 2,00,000 to be paid
immediately. He was also awarded rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. Both the sentences
were to run concurrently.
6|Page
13. Rahul appealed before the HC seeking acquittal where as state appealed demanding life
imprisonment and also the enhancement of amount of compensation.
14. HC adjudicated in favor of the accused by acquitting him from the charges and dismissed
the appeal of sates and held that the charges could not be proved against the accused.
15. Now state has filed an appeal under aforesaid section to award life imprisonment to the
accused and also to enhance compensation awarded by the session court to 3.50,000 to be
paid by the accused to the victim in addition to the compensation to be paid by the state
govt. u/s 37 a cpc.
16. The state also sought permission for addition of charge under section 366 IPC
7|Page
S TAT E M E N T O F I S S U E S
THE APPELLANTS
HONBLE COURT,
THE FOLLOWING
QUESTIONS:
___________
ISSUE 1
WHETHER THE ACCUSED HAD COMMON
INTENTION OF USING ACID BOTTLE IN THERE
PLAN OF ABDUCTION ?
ISSUE 2
WHETHER THE ACCUSED IS GUILITY OF ACID
AT T A C K O R N O T ?
ISSUE 3
WHETHER THE ACCUSED IS GUILITY OF
S TA L K I N G O R N O T ?
ISSUE 4
WHETHER THE ACCUSED IS GUILITY OF
ABDUCTION OR NOT?
8|Page
___________
_____________________
S U M M A RY O F A R G U M E N T S
I. Whether the accused had common intention of using acid bottlein there plan of
abduction?
It is humbly submitted that before the honorable court that the accused Rhul is guility of having
common intention with sanjay of using an acid bottle in their plan of abduction. He aggreed to
the idea of sanjay Accused no. 2 to use it as tool to force Meera to marry her if she refuses.
IV.
9|Page
A R G U M E N T S A D VA N C E D
I.
.
1 208 II G.L.J 1596(SC)
2 848G.L.J (1978)
10 | P a g e
In the case of Parivartan Kendra v. union of India4 Though in this case we are not issuing
3 2014-SC 427
4 867 SC 2013
11 | P a g e
Any guidelines different from the guidelines issued in Laxmis case,we should not forget
that the younger sister was also injured by the acid attack.
sufferance is not as that of the elder one, but she also requires treatment and
rehabilitation. It is to be noted that this Court in Laxmis case(supra) doesnt put a bar on
the Govt. to award compensation limited to Rs.3 Lakhs. Therefore, this Court deems it
proper to award a compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs and accordingly, we direct the
concerned Government to compensate the victim to a tune of Rs. 10 Lakhs, and in light
of the Judgment given in Laxmis case we direct the concerned State Government of
Bihar to compensate the main victims sister, Sonam to a tune`of Rs. 3 Lakhs.
In the aforesaid case the victim has already spent more than
a. 6.5 lakhs on 6 major surgeries done til date
b. 10- 15 more surgeries still need to be done.
c. Despite various surgeries Meera has permanently lost vision of her left eye
d. Permanent scars not only on the skin of her face and hands will remain but
also deep inside her memory which together with loss of vision of left eye will
adversaly affect her future prospects.
e. Her father lost his job because he was too busy in her treatment. now he is
jobless and there is no one to support her family.
III.
OR NOT ?
1. It is humble submitted before the honorable court that the charges on accused is also charged
with the offense of stalking under section 354 D of the IPC
Section 354 D of the IPC5 states that any man who follows a women and contacts or attempt to
contact such person or foster personal interaction respectfully despite a clear indication of
12 | P a g e
disinterest by such women ;or monitors the use of the internet emails or any other form of
electronic communication commits the offense of stalking.
In the aforesaid case accused rahul used to follow Meera and trying to convince her for marriage.
On one occasion Meera also made it clear to him that she would not go against the wishes of her
parents and asked him not to follow her anymore showing his clear disinterest towards him.
Despite the disinterest shown by meera Rahul continued to follow her at various places and
contacted her personally on phone and through internet.
P R AY E R
HEREFORE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ISSUES RAISED, ARGUMENT
ADVANCED,
REASONS
HONBLE COURT
GIVEN
AND
AUTHORITIES
CITED,
THIS
TO HOLD
CONVICT RAHUL
326 A R/W
SECTION
34
IPC
SESSIONS COURT RS
3,50,000
357 A
CRPC
MISCELLANEOUS
PASS ANY ORDER IT MAY DEEVE FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE EQUITY AND GOOD
CONSCIENCE.
ALL WHICH IS HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e