Symbiosis Law School, Pune

Moot Court Problem for Internal Moot to be conducted on 11March, 2018

For
IV Semester of B.A/B.B.A, LL. B (Hons.) students
(Constitutional Law II & Law of Crimes I)

Union of Sindhustanis a Federal Democratic Secular Republic with Rule of Law, Independent
Judiciary, Free Media and Vibrant Civil Society. The Constitutional and legal system of
Sindhustan is identical to that of “Union of India”. Sindhustan has a bicameral legislature at
the Union level having two houses – Jan Sabha (Lower House) &Pradesh Sabha (Upper
House).State of NCT of Raj Nagaris the Capital State under the Union of Sindhustan, having
its own Legislative Assembly. The “law and order” in the State of NCT of Raj Nagar is
maintained by the Union Government as it is not a full-fledged State like other States under
the Union of Sindhustan.

The State of Kammu and Jashmir enjoys a special status under Article 370 of the
Constitution of Sindhustan. Kammu and Jashmir is an integral part of Sindhustan, but the
neighbouring country – Atankistan – had illegally occupied 1/3rd territory of the State by
military force even before the King of erstwhile Princely State of Kammu&Jashmirjoined the
Dominion of Sindhustan by signing an instrument of accession after the independence of
Sindhustan from the FirangiRule.Atankistan has also made a false claim over remaining
territory which is legitimately occupied by Sindhustan and tried to internationalize the so
called dispute.Kammu and Jashmirhas a democratically elected Government.Atankistanhas
been responsible for promoting cross border terrorism and it is a safe haven for the anti-
Sindhustan terrorist organizations demanding independence of Kammu and Jashmirfrom
Sindhustan. It also supports the political front demanding independence forKammu and
Jashmiri.e. Burriyat Conference. There have been 4 wars between Sindhustan and Atankistan
in last 70 years of their existence. Atankistanhas suffered a humiliating defeat in all these
wars.

Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji, who is resident of Telguda State, is member of Jan Sabha. On 14th
August, 2017, he delivered a controversial speech in the Jan Sabha about the situation
prevailing in the State of Kammu and Jashmir. In his speech, he demanded that the Union
Government must conduct a plebiscite in that State so that the people could exercise their
“right to self-determination”. He also appealed to the people of the State to fight for the
independence through all available means. He also instigated the people of the State to
protest against the security forces, if they the forces commit human rights violations and
appealed to the people to supportBurriyat Conference. He also called the terrorists attacking
security forces as “freedom fighters”. He also praised the moral support extended by
Atankistanfor supporting those who have been fighting for the independence of Kammu and
Jashmir. The said speech was telecasted live on State-run channel i.e.Jan Sabha TV.

The extracts of his provocative and so called anti-national speech were published by a
newspaper called “Hizbul Times” published from Raj Nagar. Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji is the
editor, printer and publisher of the Hizbul Times.The State of NCT of Raj Nagar Police filed
an FIR against Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji under Section 124A of the SPC (Sindhustan Penal
Code) for the offence of sedition. He was arrested and produced before the Judicial
Magistrate and later remanded to police custody for 5 days. During the course of
investigation, the Police learnt that Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji, on 10 August, 2017, met with the

1
leader of Burriyat Conference, Mr. Taimur Lang and the AtankistanHigh Commissioner in
Sindhustan, Mr. Dipu Multan at the official residence of Mr. Aurangzeb Khiljiat Raj Nagar.In
that meeting it was decided that Mr. Aurangzeb Khiljishould use the forum of Jan Sabha to
highlight the issue of Kammu and Jashmirfor delivering a pro-separatist speech. The Police
subsequently arrested Mr. Taimur Lung as well. Mr. Dipu Multan was directed by the Union
Government to leave the country. The Police collected evidences including telephone
conversations, CCTV footages and emails exchanged between the accused persons indicating
towards the criminal conspiracy. Subsequently, the charge sheet was filed while the accused
were in judicial custody. They were charged by the Sessions Court for offences under Section
120B and 124A of Sindhustan Penal Code. Both, Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji and Mr. Taimur Lang
were punished by the Sessions Court of State of NCT of Raj Nagar,only under Section 120B,
for hatching a conspiracy to deliver/publish seditious speech and awarded 7 years
imprisonment.

In the meantime, a privilege motion was introduced in the Jan Sabha by one of the members
of the ruling party against Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji for contempt of the House. The matter was
referred to the privilege committee of the House. The Committee issued a show cause notice
to Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji and it was served on him while he was in judicial custody. He was
asked to send the written reply within 4 days through the Jail authorities. Next day, Mr.
Aurangzeb Khiljisent a request, through the Jail authorities, to the Privilege Committee to
give him oral hearing before the Committee or alternatively he should be given an
opportunity to be defended through his lawyer before the Committee. It was rejected by the
Committee and he was asked to submit a written reply. He sent the written reply, under
protest, to the Privilege Committee of Jan Sabha. Subsequently, he was expelled by the
Speaker of Jan Sabha from the House under Article 105 (3) of the Constitution, on the basis
of the recommendation made by the Committee and the resolution passed unanimously by the
House.Mr. Aurangzeb Khiljichallenged the validity of his expulsion in the High Court of Raj
Nagar under Article 226 of the Constitution but the petition was rejected by the High Court
on merit.

Mr. Aurangzeb Khilji (The Appellant) filed an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of
Sindhustan against The State of NCT of Raj (The Respondent). He challenged the validity of
his conviction by the Sessions Court under Section 120B of the Sindhustan Penal Code by
saying that he enjoyed immunity from the FIR and subsequent prosecution under Article 105
(2) of the Constitution, in respect of the speech delivered by him in Jan Sabha. He also
argued that his speech did not amount to sedition. Simultaneously, he also filed another
appeal against The Hon’ble Speaker, Jan Sabha and Union of Sindhustan(The Respondents),
under Article 136,challenging the Raj Nagar High Court’s judgment regarding the validity of
Speaker’s decision to expel him from Jan Sabha. He argued that the High Court failed to take
into consideration the fact that that thePrivilege Committee of Jan Sabha did not give him
fair hearing and the Jan Sabha, in any case, did not have power to expel him.Both the appeals
were clubbed together by the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice has constituted a bench of 7
Judges and the matter is posted for hearing before it on 11 March, 2018.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: All characters, names and events mentioned in this ‘Moot Court Problem’ are
entirely fictitious and used for purely academic purposes only. Any similarity to actual events
or persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.This Moot Problem has been framed byDr.
(Prof.) ShashikantHajarefor solely academic purposes, for exclusive use atSymbiosis Law
School Pune only. Any use of the moot problem without the prior permission of the author of
the problem shall be violation of laws relating ‘copyright’.