IN THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT

___________________________________________________________________________
C.A. No.: ______/2016
Petition filed under Art, 32
Of the Constitution of India, 1950.
(Granted leave to appeal)
___________________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, DELHAN

PETITIONER
V.

UNION OF INDIPI

RESPONDENT

___________________________________________________________________________
On Submission to the Honble Chief Justice & Other
Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of Indipi.
__________________________________________________________________
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

INDEX
S.NO. Content

Page(s)

1. THE LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

II OF XIV

2. THE INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

IV OF XIV

3. BOOKS, STATUORY COMPILATIONS

V OF XIV

4. WEB SOURCES, INTERNET ARTICLES

V OF XIV

5. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

VI OF XIV

6. SYNOPSIS OF FACTS

VII,VIII OF

XIV
7. ISSUES

IX OF

XIV
8. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
9. PLEADINGS

X,XI OF XIV
XII,XIII

OF XIV
10. PRAYER

XIV OF

XIV

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
S.NO. Abbreviations Details
1.
2.

IPC-Indipi Penal Code.

ILRI- International Legal Research Institute.

3.

NLU-National Law University

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
TABLE OF CASES:
S. No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

CASES
Case of Assaduddin Owaisi-2016
State V Jasbir Chauhan 21 February 2016
Sanskar Marathe V The State of Maharashtra And Anr,

PAGE No.
Page 5 of
Page 2 of 17
Page 10 of 17

17 March 2015
Press Council Act,1978
Salwa Judum V State of Chhattisgarh

Page
Page 11 of 17

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

BOOKS:
1. MP JAIN Constititutional Law.
2. KD GAUR Criminal Law.
3. Criminal Manual.-I.P.C.(Universal Publications Law House).
STATUTORY COMPILATIONS:
1. The Code of Civil Procedure,1908
2. The Constitution of India, 1950.
3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860.
WEB SOURCES:
1. www.scconline.com
2. www.indlaw.com
3. www.indiakanoon.org
INTERNET ARTICLES:
1. Dna India-www.dnaindia.in/assadduddinowais/case/sedition
2. Live Law-www.livelaw.in/aseemtrivedicartooncase
3. Press Coucil-www.livelaw.in/pressguidelines

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Appellants have approached this Honble Supreme Court of Indipi through suit filed under
art 32 of The Constitution of Indipi , 1950.

ART 32 READS AS UNDER:

32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part:
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in
the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may
be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clause ( 1 ) and ( 2 ),
Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its
jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause ( 2 )
(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for
by this Constitution

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

SYNOPSIS OF FACTS
1.The International Legal Research Institute (ILRI) is a Research centric institute in the
Country of Indipi. The civil and criminal laws of Indipi are similar to the laws of India. The
ILRI is involved in research relating to the policies of the Government and their
implementation at the grass root level.
2. Arijit Vaishya, a student of IV year of National Law University, Delhan submitted his
research paper on the topic The Armed Forces Special Power Act, 1967: A boon or a tool of
Injustice? The Armed Forces Special Power Act, 1967 is an Act of Parliament of Indipi
enacted to enable certain special powers to be conferred upon members of the armed forces
in disturbed areas such as in the State of Moniru. Moniru is a state in Indipi which suffers
from extreme naxalite problems and thus the Indipi Army is under constant instruction to
maintain law and order in the State. In a number of instances, the Indipi Army has been
criticized on the allegations that the Army has been involved in a number of human rights
violations against the residents of Moniru state.
3. Veer Bhandari -Another student of III year of the same University, NLU DELHAN,
submitted a poster in the Conference the topic of which wasState Rule or Army Rule: the State
of Moniru.
4.Both were arrested by Delhan Police ,there was one video clip by Mr. Pranit Roy a media
representative. There was telecast of that clip on all news channels.
5. The initial hearing began in Delhan Sessions Court on November 22, 2015 on the issue of
- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

admission of the case. The Prosecution lawyer argued that the statements made by Accused
no.1, Arijit and the poster made by Accused no. 2 were made with an intention to excite
hatred against the democratically elected Government in Indipi and were intended to also
uproot the democratic setup of India. The Defence lawyer argued that the statements and
poster were covered under the freedom given under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of
Indipi.
6. The Court did not agree with the arguments of the Defence lawyer and on the grounds
that the right under Article 19(1)(a) is subject to the reasonable restriction of the interests of
sovereignty and integrity of India and incitement to an offence admitted the case for trial.
Surprised with the decision of the Delhan Sessions Court.
7. National Law University, Delhan filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court of Indipi on
December 5, 2015.petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the constitution validity of
Section 124Athe Indipi Penal Code, 1860-IPC on the ground that it is violative of Article 19(1)
(a) and Article19 (2) and thus ultra-vires the Constitution. The Court has admitted the petition.

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

ISSUES
1

WHETHER RESTRICTIONS CAN BE IMPOSED UPON THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH

AND EXPRESSION OF ANY INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP?

WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OF THE VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJITS

PRESENTATION AND VEER BHANDARI POSTER PRESENTED BY MR.PRANIT
ROY?

WHETHER THERE IS ANY OFFENCE STATING THE LOOPHOLES OR THE

ISSUES,WHERE THE GOVERNMENT LACKS IN PUBLIC WELFARE?
4 .

WHETHER THE RESTRICTION WAS PUT ON THE TELECAST OF THE

VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJIT AND VEER BHANDARI BY THE MINISTRY OF

BROADCASTING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIPI,IF THERE IS ANY INTENTION TO
EXCITE HATRED AGAINST THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT
IN INDIPI AND WERE INTENDED TO ALSO UPROOT THE DEMOCRATIC SETUP
OF INDIPI?
5 .

WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OR ENQUIRY OF ARMY

OPERATIONS GOING ON IN THE STATE OF MONIRU AGAINST NAXALITES?

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.
1.WHETHER RESTRICTIONS CAN BE IMPOSED UPON THE FREEDOM OF
SPEECH AND EXPRESSION OF ANY INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP?
It is given in the case and facts that it was a conference at ILRI, this institute organizes these
type of seminars and conferences to provide a platform to intellectuals to share their
knowledge and research in areas of Public Law. When this is the platform for discussion the
topic related to human rights violation in naxalite areas can be done , this a platform for
discussion of Government policies, achievements and backdrops also. If the person is telling
about the problem of that area it should be carefully listened and solution must be searched for
the problem. But if there is anything which is against the nation against the Government, which
violates Rules and regulations there restrictions can be imposed.
2.WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OF THE VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJITS
PRESENTATION AND VEER BHANDARI POSTER PRESENTED BY MR.PRANIT
ROY?
It is given in the case and facts that Mr.Pranit Roy a media representative attending the
Conference as a Media Representative from Daily News Indipi (a leading news channel in
Indipi), made a video of Arijits presentation. The media of the country provides information to
the public of the nation. All reports,articles,pictures,videos are checked and verified than only
they are telecasted ON AIR. Media follows the rules and regulations guidelines by the
Broadcasting Ministry, Government of Indipi.
3.WHETHER THERE IS ANY OFFENCE STATING THE LOOPHOLES OR THE
ISSUES,WHERE THE GOVERNMENT LACKS IN PUBLIC WELFARE THROUGH
SPEECHES AND POSTERS?
There is an offence if anything said against the nation, its culture, constitution, Government or
any of the religions,etc.

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

4.WHETHER THE RESTRICTION WAS PUT ON THE TELECAST OF THE

VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJIT AND VEER BHANDARI BY THE MINISTRY OF
BROADCASTING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIPI,IF THERE IS ANY INTENTION TO
EXCITE HATRED AGAINST THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT
IN INDIPI AND WERE INTENDED TO ALSO UPROOT THE DEMOCRATIC SETUP
OF INDIPI?
If it is stopped than it is the violation of our nations press and media. It is violation of our
Constitutional right Freedom of Press. Indirectly in Indipi media is the fourth pillar of
democracy.
5.WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OR ENQUIRY OF ARMY OPERATIONS
GOING ON IN THE STATE OF MONIRU AGAINST NAXALITES?
The Government and all its armed forces departments are following the proper code of conduct.
There is a daily report of all the Naxalites operation provided daily to the Defence
Ministry,Government of Indipi.No such violation of human rights is there.No need for any
commission

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

PLEADINGS
1.WHETHER RESTRICTIONS CAN BE IMPOSED UPON THE FREEDOM OF
SPEECH AND EXPRESSION OF ANY INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP?
It is humbly submitted before the Honourable Court the Constitution Article provides1.1. Freedom of Speech and Expression
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitiution of Indipi includes the right to express ones views and
opinions at any issue through any medium, e.g. by words of mouth, writing, printing, picture,
film, movie, etc. It thus includes the freedom of communication and the right to propagate or
publish opinion.But Article 19(2) provides Reasonable restrictions for the benefit of public
safety,security of state,public order,sovereignity and integrity.1
2.WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OF THE VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJITS
PRESENTATION AND VEER BHANDARI POSTER PRESENTED BY MR.PRANIT
ROY?
2.1. It is further submitted before the Honourable Court regarding Checking of video clip and its
originality, the court has given its decision that in the video it is shown that such video-evidence
clearly indicates that accused was in possession of a firearm which shows that accused carries
pistol and firing was done with that pistol.2
3.WHETHER THERE IS ANY OFFENCE STATING THE LOOPHOLES OR THE
ISSUES,WHERE THE GOVERNMENT LACKS IN PUBLIC WELFARE THROUGH
SPEECHES AND POSTERS?
3.1. It is humbly submitted before the Honourable Court that it is an offence if the person is
providing any hatred speech, cartoon poster, through which harm can be provided to the nation.

1 Case of Sedition on Assaduddin Owaisi.2016

2 State vs Jasbir Chauhan on 21 February, 2015

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

3.2.. A citizen has a right to say or write whatever he likes about the Government, or its
measures, by way of criticism or comments, so long as he does not incite people to violence
against the Government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder'3.

4.WHETHER THE RESTRICTION WAS PUT ON THE TELECAST OF THE

VIDEO CLIP OF ARIJIT AND VEER BHANDARI BY THE MINISTRY OF
BROADCASTING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIPI,IF THERE IS ANY INTENTION TO
EXCITE HATRED AGAINST THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT
IN INDIPI AND WERE INTENDED TO ALSO UPROOT THE DEMOCRATIC SETUP
OF INDIPI?
4.1 It is further submitted before Honourable Court that Press follows all guidelines4 of Press
Council and Broadcating electronice media. The department takes action if any harmful content
is there.
5.WHETHER THERE WAS ANY CHECK OR ENQUIRY OF ARMY OPERATIONS
GOING ON IN THE STATE OF MONIRU AGAINST NAXALITES?
5.1 It is further submitted before the Honourable Court that there is no need of any Enquiry
Commission, all naxalite operations reports are there with the Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India.5

3 Sanskar Marathe vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 17 March, 2015

4 Press Council Act,1978
5 Salwa Judum vs State of Chattisgarh

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -

- PLEADINGS -

Page | 1
PRAYER

Wherefore, in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced, reasons given and authorities
cited, this Honble Court may be pleased to:
1. UPHOLD the impugned orders of the Honble Delhan Sessions Court.
2. ORDER that the video is correct and verified can be used as an evidence .
3. ADJUDGE that Article 19(2) provides incitement of order.
4. DECLARE that there is harm in discussing about Government policies, public issues in an
unmannered way of disturbing public harmony or creating any harm to nation.
5. DECLARE that Arijit and Veer Bhandari are accused.
6. DECLARE that there is no need or requirement of any Enquiry commission to check the
Army Operations and Violation of Human Rights by the Army in the naxalite affected Moniru
State.
And any other relief that this Honble Court may be pleased to grant in the interest of justice,
equity and good conscience.

AND FOR THIS THE RESPONDENT SHALL FOREVER PRAY.

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT

- MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT -