Sunteți pe pagina 1din 12

Moot Compromis

1. Bombadar is a major coastal town in Indiana, located in the State of Mritashtra. It is a very
commercially viable town and is strategically significant in the light of the fact that it
connects the Arabian Sea to the rest of Indiana. The citizens of Mritashtra are very
politically active and have a finger on the pulse with respect to all political developments
in the city, which is the political center of the State of Mritashtra.

2. Mr. Bipin is an eminent politician in Mritashtra and has been a part of politics for the past
fifteen years. Mr. Bipin’s father, popularly known in Mritashtra as “Guruji”, has been the
Chief Minister of the State of Mritashtra twice in 2009 and 2014. Mr. Bipin stood for
elections for the seat of Kailashpada with an eye on the post of Chief Minister for the first
time after his father’s retirement from politics, having been elected MLA twice previously
and being a part of his father’s cabinet on both occasions. The elections were to be held on
31st March, 2019. Mr. Bipin’s selection was however uncertain as the residents of the
country have been fed up of dynasty politics and were looking for a new face for their State,
especially in light of the recent elections at the Centre which had ushered in a sea change
in political structures, aiming to end dynastic politics.

3. Mr. Bipin’s party’s ideology is seen to be conservative, and considered to be borderline


regressive to some. Mr. Bipin in the run-up to the 2019 Legislative Assembly made a
concerted effort to dispel this public impression, and has been involved in many public
campaigns to project himself as a moderate, with a special emphasis on women’s rights and
decisional autonomy. These efforts have made a difference (based on some in-house
opinion polls) and the public now looks upon him more favorably in this regard.

4. Mr. Bipin has a son Mr. Bunty, aged twenty-five years, who is a graduate in Theology from
Byculla College. The personal life of this family being very public, the engagement of Mr.
Bunty with a certain Ms. Kukoo on 24th March, 2019 was the most celebrated Page-3 event
of the State that year.

5. Ms. Anjali, an independent comic artist, runs her own agency called “Raw” which is known
for its scathing critique of current events through visual representations – unapologetic to
and irrespective of the regime in power at the time. Quite interestingly, Raw does not
publish its comics in physical form since it strongly believes in paper conservation. Instead,
it shares its content purely through its own Twitter business account (@RawComix), the
income of which it has relied on for existence since its inception in the year 2013. Raw’s
independence has attracted the eyes of many, and it now has nearly one and half million
followers on Twitter, with a major chunk of the following coming from Mritashtra because
of its emphasis more on local events. In the run up to the 2014 Legislative Assembly
elections in Mritashtra, Mr. Bipin very often retweeted Raw’s tweets to put down the
opposition for their lack of credibility, which is considered by some to have been
instrumental in securing his and his father’s victory.

Page 1 of 12
6. The external opinion polls conducted in March 2019 reflected broadly the following vote
shares:
Candidate Name Party Name Vote Share
Mr. Bipin Gantantra Party 53%
Mr. Ganesh Apna Party 44%
Others (Colly.) 3%

7. Knowing historically that vote shares in opinion polls are always slightly skewed against
the incumbent party, Mr. Bipin was comfortable with the above figure and very confident
about his victory in the upcoming elections.

8. On 30th March, 2019, there were some reports by non-mainstream online blogs which stated
that based on credible information available to them from undisclosed sources, Mr. Bipin
was involved in carrying out “virginity tests” on his to-be daughter in law, Ms. Kukoo. No
mainstream news outlet took up this news for reporting either online or offline, giving the
standard reason that they needed to independently verify it and couldn’t publish an account
on the same. Raw’s Twitter account follows very few other journalistic accounts, based on
who they believe to be ethical and reliable. Seeing the very few blogs it followed coming
out with this news, and believing that the public had a right to know that Mr. Bipin’s shift
to moderate has been an eyewash, Ms. Anjali produced a comic strip (“Annexure A-1”)
believing it to be her duty to inform the public so that they make a considered decision in
the elections scheduled the next day.

9. As soon as the comic was published, the Twitterati of Mritashtra was taken aback. In a
matter of five hours, the tweet went viral as it was re-tweeted 101k times with 150k likes.
This was a matter of great concern to the public, and soon the news of this tweet going viral
spread onto other platforms. Mr. Bipin did not comment on this matter since he did not
want to acknowledge and inadvertently give any credibility to the news, but the opposition
leaders latched on to the news and marked its importance. The official twitter account of
Mr. Bipin’s party rubbished this “rumour”, and made a scathing attack on Raw alleging
that it had got money from the opposition’s lobbyists for running this unconfirmed story.
Mr. Bipin did not believe that the news would have a great effect on his election, since most
of his electorate of focus were not on Twitter nor did they understand what a tweet meant.

10. The elections are conducted peacefully with a voter turnout of 65.6%. The exit polls show
that now Mr. Ganesh has got a majority share of votes at 55%.

11. With the results being published on 1st April, 2019, the Apna Party sweepingly won the
elections. Mr. Bipin was shattered, and was convinced that the entire blame for his loss was
attributable to Raw’s cartoon. He filed a complaint under Section 200 read with Section
500/34 of the IPC on 01.04.2019 against Ms. Anjali, the agency Raw and its two directors
of which cognizance was taken under by the Magistrate under Section 190(1)(a) of the
Cr.P.C.

Page 2 of 12
12. In the pre-summoning evidence, three witnesses were prodcued- Mr. Bunty, Ms. Kukoo
and himself. Their statements were in line with their official position in public (when they
had spoken to the media) which was to the effect that the three had met a certain Ms. Batya,
owner of BeSure Health Clinic at the Claridges Hotel to set-up a regular health check-up
with absolute privacy so as to not give a chance to the hungry media to sensationalize the
story, and negatively affect Mr. Bipin’s image right before the elections. Mr. Bunty and
Ms. Kukoo then proceeded to the clinic on the night of 17th March for this check-up
scheduled by Dr. Sartaj. Mr. Bunty and Ms. Kukoo confirmed that Dr. Sartaj had carried
out the check-up, and there were no other doctors assisting him in the room where the said
check-up was conducted. All three also maintained that there was no paper trail relating to
this check-up since they wanted to do it off the record for the above mentioned reasons.

13. The learned magistrate by order dated 2nd April, 2019 passed in Complaint Case No. 324
of 2019, proceeded to summon accused to stand for trial under Section 500 read with
Section 34 of the IPC holding that on the basis of preliminary oral and documentary
evidence the complainant had made out a prima facie case against the Accused 1-4 that
they had ‘formed an association in order to tarnish the image of the complainant thereby
sharing common intention towards that end.’

14. On conclusion of investigation, the final report filed in the instant case has not revealed any
specific finding for determining whether the clinic indulges in such acts. During the
investigation, CCTV footage of the clinic on the night of 17th March, 2019 was secured.
The CCTV camera, being of a poor quality and make, gave footage which could not
confirm the identity of a couple entering the clinic on the night of 17th March, 2019 at 9:10
PM, but the fact that a couple entered the clinic and left it at 10:05 PM could be confirmed.
It could also be made out that the couple are of the height and build of Mr. Bunty and Ms.
Kukoo. The footage also showed the clinic’s surgeon Dr. Sartaj leaving the clinic along
with his assistant Mr. Majid twenty minutes after the departure of the unconfirmed couple.
The agency head, Ms. Batya, had not visited the clinic the entire week, including 17th
March, 2019.

15. The statements of the other witnesses in the case recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 1972
have been annexed (Annexures A-2 to A-5). Dr. Sartaj’s statement was not recorded
because shortly after the night of 17th March, 2019, he could not be located by the police
during investigation- he was last seen at a medical conference in Zurich on 30th March,
2019.

16. During the trial, all statements except that of DW-1 were in absolute conformity with their
statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 1972. However, DW-1 went hostile. She went back
on her statement to state that while she had met the accused, she did not discuss any specific
procedure and had only discussed that Ms. Kukoo go through a regular health check-up so
that there would be no issues during the wedding which was to happen soon. She also stated
that the accused had chosen their clinic to ensure privacy in the matter, since the accused

Page 3 of 12
did not want any negative rumors spread about his to-be daughter-in-law’s health condition,
which would have anyway happened had they gone to a very big establishment. She stated
that she had been called to the police station on 6th April, 2019 at 8:00 p.m. for the purpose
of investigation in relation to the defamation case filed by Mr. Bipin. She was made to sign
on blank papers by the police. She identified the signatures made on her S. 161 statement,
however, denies the content thereof.

17. The accused in the instant case have pleaded not guilty under Section 251 of Cr.P.C
maintained its claim that they were covered under the exception 1 to Section 499 of the
IPC. Ms. Anjali also claimed that she had the CCTV footage which shows the couple, Mr.
Bunty and Ms. Kukoo entering the premises of BeSure Health Clinic on 17th March, 2019.

18. The media channels in Mritashtra have been widely covering the trial and it is alleged that
Mr. Bipin being a politician of high standing has been attempting to buy the witnesses in
the case. The residents of Kailashpada believe that the act committed by the Bipin family
is not only outrageous but also cruel and degrading. The residents have been demanding
for justice stating that any tolerance for such abusive ‘virginity tests’ will only reflect an
appalling lack of will to protect the rights of women in the country.

19. Having framed charges against Ms. Anjali, her agency, Raw and its two directors, u/s
500/34 of the IPC the case is put up for finally hearing before the Trial Court in Kailashpada
on 21.09.2019.
Note: All laws of Indiana are pari materia to laws of India. The provisions of the Information
Technology Act, 2000 will not be applicable for the purposes of this Moot.
Annexures to the Moot Compromis:
Annexure A-1: Screenshot of the tweet tweeted from Raw Comix’s twitter account
Annexure A-2: Statement of PW-1: Guard at BeSure Health Clinic (Mr. Malcolm)
Annexure A-3: Annexure A-3: Statement of PW-2: Waiter at Restaurant (Ms. Kanta)
Annexure A-4: Annexure A-4: Statement of PW-3: Assisting Doctor (Mr. Majid)
Annexure A-5: Annexure A-5: Statement of DW-1: Head of Agency (Ms. Batya)

Page 4 of 12
Annexure A-1: Screenshot of the tweet tweeted from Raw Comix’s twitter account

Page 5 of 12
Annexure A-2: Statement of PW-1: Guard at BeSure Health Clinic (Mr.
Malcolm)

I am the guard of BeSure Health Clinic. I have been working here


for the last 4 years as a guard. I work on the evening shift, from
6 PM to 12 PM. On the night of 17th March, 2019, I saw a couple
entering the clinic. I identify the sir as Mr. Bunty, and the madam as
Ms. Kukoo. They both entered together at around 8:30 PM and left
at around 10:30 PM. I do not know which doctor they met inside the
clinic, or for what work they went for. They entered and exited
swiftly, without any delay in their black Scorpio car. I do not know
anything more.

Dated: 03-04-2019

Page 6 of 12
Annexure A-3: Statement of PW-2: Waiter at Restaurant (Ms. Kanta)

I am a waiter at Claridges restaurant, and have been working there


for the past 1 year. On the morning of 16th March, 2019 at around
11 AM, I was serving 3 people at a private room- Mr. Bipin, his son
and a third person who I can now identify as DW-3. I could not hear
what they were discussing. I caught a glimpse of some papers which
looked like medical papers, but I cannot be sure of that. It seems like
they were finalizing a plan for something and were talking in very
hushed tones, in a huddle and so I could not make out what they
were talking about. They ordered tea and some cookies, completed
their conversation, shook hands- not just to say goodbye but as if they
had come to some conclusion or deal- and then left shortly afterward.
I was not allowed to linger around due to the security people who
would not let me stay and would call me only when they wanted to
order something. I do not know anything more.

Dated: 05-04-2019

Page 7 of 12
Annexure A-4: Statement of PW-3: Assisting Doctor (Mr. Majid)

I am the assisting doctor of Dr. Sartaj. I have been working at


BeSure Health Clinic for the last 2 years, but was assigned to
Dr. Sartaj only since the last 3 months. I assist him in all his
work, including check-ups and operations. There are some matters
for some special clients which Dr. Sartaj does not involve me,
and handles himself. I am not aware of the nature of such
consultations, since I am not privy to them. On the night of 17th
March, 2019, at around 9 PM, a couple came in and had specifically
asked for Dr. Sartaj. I identify them as Mr. Bunty and Ms. Kukoo.
Dr. Sartaj asked me to withdraw from this case. I saw them enter
and leave after about 45 minutes; I do not know what they consulted
him for neither do I know what advice they were given. They left
absolutely normally, and swiftly. Dr. Sartaj did not hand me any
medical papers or records concerning them, and we never discussed
this particular matter. Since I had only joined him recently, I
did not ask him about this either. I do not know anything more.
Dated: 04-04-2019

Page 8 of 12
Annexure A-5: Statement of DW-1: Head of Agency (Ms. Batya)

I am the head of the BeSure Health Clinic. I have been heading


the same since the last 10 years. We offer all kinds of health
services to our clients. I met the accused and his son on 16 th
March, 2019 at the Claridges hotel. He wanted to have a virginity
test performed on Ms. Kukoo. We discussed that he will come with
his son and his fiancé the next night at the clinic, and that we
will perform the test. I had assigned the case to Dr. Malcolm. I
did not follow up with the matter, since we wanted to keep the
communication at a minimum and I do not know what happened after
that but I did not hear from the accused or any member of his
family after that. I have nothing else to say about this matter,
I have shared everything that I know.
Dated: 06-04-2019

Sd/-

Ms. Batya

Page 9 of 12
Moot Court Society
Campus Law Centre
University of Delhi
Common Induction Moot 2019
Rules and Procedure

1) REGISTRATION:
Last date to register is 16th, September, 2019 by 12 Noon at the following link:
https://forms.gle/GSCYu6A3QZ5x8H4G7
Kindly note, no extension or delay will be entertained in any circumstances. In case of
multiple registrations with regard to a participant, the last registration entry will only be
considered.
2) REGULATIONS:
I. Language: The language of the competition shall be ENGLISH only
II. Eligibility: The competition is open for all the bona fide students of Campus Law
Centre pursuing 3-year LL. B. and are not already a member of the Moot Court
Society
III. Team composition: There shall be no teams. Participant shall participate
individually
IV. Memorial: The following requirement of a memorial must be followed, the non-
conferment of which will be penalized:

The Memorial should be either on behalf of Complainant or on behalf of Defence, but


not both. The final Memorial should be emailed to Moot Court Society at
mootcourtsociety.clc@gmail.com with subject “CIM Memorial 2019- Memorial of Behalf of
Complainant or Memorial on Behalf of Defence” not later than 19th of September, 09:59
a.m. AND two HARD/PHYSICAL COPY of the same must be submitted at Moot Court
Society room i.e. Room No. 23 by 02:00 p.m., 19th of September, 2019
Late submission of HARD COPY of Memorials will be at with a deduction of 2 marks in
Memo till 02:30 p.m. and deduction of 5 marks in memo till 02:45 p.m. No memorial shall be
accepted beyond 02:45 p.m. The soft copy of the memorial must be in PDF format only.

Once the memorial is submitted no subsequent amendments shall be allowed


There should be no discrepancy between the soft copy and hard copy of the memorial
If two participants are found to have the same/similar memorial, both shall be subject to
disqualification.

The format of the memorial should be as follows:


1. On A4 size paper
2. Main body text: Times New Roman, Font Size 12, Line Spacing 1.5
3. Footnotes text: Times New Roman, Font Size 10, Line Spacing 1.0
4. A margin measuring 1 inch on all sides of each page

Page 10 of 12
5. Page numbering should be at the bottom centre of the page
6. Memorials must be printed on one side and spiral-bound
7. The Memorial must not mention any of your personal detail such as
Name, Year, Roll Number, Contact details, etc. which reveal your
identity in any manner
8. For HARD COPY a page should be attached to the cover page of the
memorial containing the following: Name, Year, Roll Number,
Section, Contact Number, Email address and side chosen i.e. <insert>

The memorial must necessarily contain (but may not be restricted to) the following in the
order mentioned below:
a. Front Page
b. Table of Contents (1 Page)
c. Index of Authorities (upto 2 Pages)
d. Statement of Jurisdiction (1 Page)
e. Statement of Facts (1 Page)
f. Statement of Issues (1 Page)
g. Summary of Arguments (upto 2 Pages)
h. Arguments Advanced (upto 15 pages)
i. Prayer (1 Page)

No additional facts must be incorporated or relied upon other than facts mentioned in the
Moot Compromis.

The style of footnoting must be consistent.

The footnotes must be restricted for providing only bare citations and must not be
accompanied by any form of description or explanation or authorities relied upon.

The front page of the memorial must be BLUE for Complainant and RED for Defence.

The cover page of the Memorial must state the following:


a. COMMON INDUCTION MOOT 2019, CAMPUS LAW CENTRE
b. Name and place of the Court
c. The cause title
d. Memorial on behalf of
e. Counsel appearing on behalf of <insert>

The scoring for the written submission (Memorial) 30 Marks which shall be divided as
follows:
a. Application and appreciation of facts (5 marks)
b. Identification and presentation of issues (5 marks)
c. Application of legal principles/ provisions, use of precedents and
authorities (10 marks)

Page 11 of 12
d. Logical structure, grammar and style (5 marks)
e. Consistent footnoting and formatting (5 marks)

Oral Rounds:
a. Each Participant shall get a total of 15 minutes to present their case. The oral
arguments should be confined to the issues presented in the Memorial
b. Scoring of ORAL ARGUMENTS (70 marks):
• Application and appreciation of Facts (15 marks)
• Understanding of law and procedure (15 marks)
• Use of authorities and precedents (10 marks)
• Response to questions and articulation (15 marks)
• Advocacy skills, court craft and demeanour (15 marks)
c. Dress Code:
For Female Counsel: White shirt with Black/White Pants, Black Blazer and Black
Shoes OR White/Black Kurta, White/Black Salwar, Black Blazer and Black Shoes.
For Male Counsel: White shirt, Black/White Pants, Black Blazer, Tie and Black shoes.
No shiny jewellery or any such other ornaments are to be borne by the participant inside
the courtroom.
d. It is to be noted that all the students who are able to submit their memorial within the
stipulated time, complying all the necessary requirements shall be eligible to present
their oral arguments.
e. Selection criteria:
• There is no win/loss in the competition for any participant and no fixed number
of students is decided to be admitted into the Society through this induction
process
• The cut off marks for the Memorial is 15 marks
• The cut off marks for the Oral Arguments is 45 marks
• All those candidates who are able to secure the cut-off marks of BOTH oral and
memorial round, and has not attracted any penalty or any other disqualification
as per the society rules will be admitted as a member of the society

NOTE:
• The decision of judges and organizers shall be final in all respect
• Any misconduct on the part of a Participant may attract disqualification
• Any clarification with respect to the competition may be sought at
mootcourtsociety.clc@gmail.com with subject line “CIM QUERY 2019”.

Page 12 of 12