Download Dowry Demands, Acid Attacks, and Domestic Violence: A Tragic Tale of Abuse - Prof. Singh and more Cheat Sheet Law in PDF only on Docsity!
MOOT PROPOSITION (GROUP-I)
Rajni and Swati were two sisters who used to live along with their family in a small village named Johan near Chandigarh. Rajni was a hardworking and ambitious girl. She wanted to be a computer engineer and used to go to college regularly and help her father in his shop work situated at Sector-17 Chandigarh. It is alleged that Ram (Accused No. 1) along with his friends (Accused No. 2, 3 and 4) used to harass the elder sister, Rajni on the streets, market and in the auto rickshaw while she was going to college. They used to make sexual advances towards her, pass lewd comments. They terrorized her that if she did not heed to their demands and agree to have sexual relations with them, they would damage and destroy her face. On 6th^ June, 20 22 , while on her way to college, Ram and his friends again stopped her way and started misbehaving with her, for which Rajni slapped Ram. On 6 th^ June, 20 22 midnight, while both sisters were sleeping, 4 men with their faces covered up, climbed upon the roof of the house of Rajni where both the sisters were sleeping. One of the assailants covered Rajni’s mouth so that she could not scream and other two held her legs so that she could not move. When assailant was pouring the acid on her body and face, the acid also fell on Swati’s body and burnt her arm. After the attack, these men did not make any effort to flee as they wanted to stay and enjoy the moment. As the acid started burning the girls, the girls started screaming and crying waking up their parents, who rushed to the rooftop. Upon this, the assailants fled. The victims were rushed to the nearest Hospital. There after two surgeries Swati recovered but Rajni remained critical even after 4 Surgeries. On 20th^ December, 2022 , while undergoing treatment, Rajni succumbed to death owing to her injuries. The victims’ family was given Rs.2 5 , 00 ,000/- from the Government for the treatment of both the girls. It has been contended that till 20 th^ December, 20 22 more than Rs. 1 5 lakhs had already been spent on their treatment. Ram along with his three friends is booked under various provisions of Indian Penal Code,
Argue on the behalf of Prosecution and Accused.
MOOT PROPOSITION (GROUP-II)
The deceased Sharda D/O Vikram married to Suresh S/O Dinesh on 17.07.20 22. Both of them studied M.B.A. in same college where they fell in love with each other. Dinesh is a high-profile industrialist and Vikram is a rich businessman, having chain of departmental stores. Both the families knew each other. It is alleged that Dinesh demanded dowry of substantial value, commensurate with his social status and also demanded to spend minimum of Rs. 1 crore on the wedding apart from dowry. On 17.07.20 22 , the day of marriage agreed dowry was paid to entire satisfaction of the Family. It is alleged that Sharda did not receive proper treatment from her in laws. Shalini, mother-in-law of Sharda made continuous Dowry demand for Mercedes Benz and for F.D. of Rs. 5 Crore. However, a F.D. of Rs. 50 Lakh in the name of Sharda was given by Vikram. Sharda gave birth to a baby girl. Sharda was a sensitive girl. She was cursed, rebuked and sent to parental house. On 20.05.20 23 Suresh reached his in-laws. He sought consent of Sharda and she returned to her matrimonial home. On 24.05.20 23 Dinesh purchased Organophosphorus from the nearest shopkeeper on the pretext that he required the same to kill the flies. On 25.05.20 23 , according to allegations Shalini forcibly administered poison to the deceased Sharda to kill her. Suresh also held the body of deceased physically and forced her to drink. During the course of administration of poison deceased struggled as such sustained injuries on her face, lips and neck. Sharda died at the Hospital. Doctors were of the opinion that death of deceased was caused due to organophosphorus poisoning. Vikram lodged a report at the Police Station mentioning the harassment caused by the three accused to the deceased for dowry. He stated that all the three accused namely Dinesh, Shalini and Suresh had forcibly administered poison with intention to kill his daughter for non-fulfilment of further demand of dowry. The accused took plea that the deceased was never mal treated on any account and was treated as daughter of the family only. Their submission was supported by the testimony of the neighbouring family also. Argue on the behalf of Prosecution and Accused.
in the moment of panic, Akshay opened the bottle and threw the acid on her face. Harish and Akshay ran away from the scene in their car and left Aarohi writhing in immense pain. She was taken to the hospital by some passerby. The doctors immediately conducted the surgeries on her as the injuries were severe in nature. A First Information Report was lodged and the statement of Aarohi was recorded. Argue on the behalf of Prosecution and Accused.
MOOT PROPOSITION (GROUP-IV)
Mark and Jessica got married in 2018 by way of Hindu rites and ceremonies. The Couple was a happily married couple till initial 6 months of their marriage. After 6 Months of marriage, Mark on purpose left his job in an MNC in which he was employed on a remuneration of Rs. 70,000/- per month. Apart from that the Company had also provided accommodation to Mark in a respectable locality of Mumbai. When Jessica confronted Mark on this, he said he wanted to start his own business for extra income and their future safety. But Mark was not able to start any business even for one year. Emma, a baby girl, also took birth out of this wedlock in
- During this time, Jessica took care of expenditure of household with her income as well as with support of her parents. Due to such failure to start business as well as inability to maintain family, Mark started drinking and his behaviour turned to be abusive towards his family. Due to this, Jessica filed for divorce in 2022 and the same was granted by the Court with primary custody of Emma awarded to Jessica. Mark was granted visitation rights every other weekend. Subsequent to the divorce, Jessica has raised serious concerns about Mark's behaviour, alleging incidents of domestic violence and a potential substance abuse problem. She now seeks to limit Mark's visitation rights and, if necessary, restrict them altogether. Argue on the behalf of Petitioner and Respondent.
MOOT PROPOSITION (GROUP-VI)
An information was lodged at Mohali police station on 2.7.20 22 regarding a murderous assault on Kulwant Kaur (deceased) and infliction of injuries on Kulwinder Singh. On basis of investigation, it came to the knowledge of the police that the Accused and the Complainant party are in close relations, living in the same homestead with separate portions earmarked by mutual agreement. Dildar Singh was the eldest member of one branch and Kulwinder Singh of another branch. As per the prosecution, on the morning of 2.7.20 22 the Accused conspired together to erect a fence inside the homestead, and also to finish up all those who obstruct their act. Around 6:00 a.m. Dildar Singh and Malkhan Singh started digging holes in the mid of the courtyard to which Kulwinder Singh protested. Dildar Singh and Malkhan Singh ordered other members Subeg Singh and Pritam Singh to finish Kulwinder Singh. Pritam Singh and Subeg Singh, rushed to the first floor of the house. Subeg Singh brought his gun and Pritam Singh came up with a sword in the balcony of the house. Subeg Singh shot at Kulwinder Singh, while Pritam Singh started towards Kulwinder Singh with a sword. The shot missed the target and another shot was fired by Subeg Singh which this time struck Kulwant Kaur (deceased) i.e wife of Kulwant Singh who was working in the courtyard. Further Pritam Singh inflicted injuries to Kulwinder Singh with a sword. Balkaran Singh and Jagdish (sons of deceased), came from outside and raised hue and cry watching their mother in serious condition. Before the villagers assembled, all except Subeg Singh, rushed out of house, who firstly threatened the villagers with dire consequences, later finding the situation against him, left the place. The villagers and two sons along with Kulwinder Singh took Kulwant Kaur to hospital where Dying declaration was recorded by doctor from Kulwant Kaur who later on succumbed to her injuries. The Defense pleaded that there was no scuffle between the parties and the fence was already inside the courtyard and it was only the other party who initiated the scuffle as they came to uproot the fence and during which shot was fired accidentally. On investigation, police found that the deceased only affirmed to what was stated in response to the queries put up by the doctor recording the dying declaration. The medical evidence shows that the injuries suffered by Deceased point to the fact that it can be possible only when the gunshot is fired from the close range and not otherwise. The accused were charged u/s 302/34 and 307/34 of the IPC. The trial court acquitted the accused on the basis of inconsistency in dying declaration and prosecution version on the one
and ocular and medical evidence on the other hand. An Appeal against acquittal has been preferred before the Hon’ble High Court. Argue on behalf of Appellants and Respondents.
Upon the matter being sent to the High Court of Purva Pradesh for confirmation of sentence, a Division Bench split on the quantum of sentence to be awarded. While one judge felt that a life sentence without possibility of parole, commutation or remission would be sufficient, the other felt that only death would be an appropriate punishment since the convict was already under a sentence of life imprisonment and some extra punishment had to be awarded for the new and ghastly crime committed by him. The matter was referred to a third judge of the High Court who felt that there was no discretion in the matter given the provisions applied and the nature of the crime and confirmed the sentence of death. Mr X’s Special Leave Petition to the Supreme Court of Indica was refused on grounds that it did not raise any issues of significant legal importance. Mr X submitted a mercy petition to the President of Indica which came to be rejected in the year 2001. Therefore, Mr X was due to be executed. Due to oversight on behalf of the prison authorities, Mr X was not kept in the death row cells at the prison, but was allowed to remain in the cells with other ordinary criminals, it is only in the year 2016 , that the same was discovered and the prisoner was sent to death row confinement. On 01.01.201 8 , the black warrant for the execution of Mr X was issued by the appropriate court. The very next day, lawyers representing a human rights organisation filed a writ petition before the High Court of Purva Pradesh claiming that Mr X cannot be executed on the grounds that his trial is vitiated by illegality and his execution would violate several provisions of the Constitution of Indica. The state opposes the same and insists on execution. The laws, case law and constitutional provisions of Indica are analogous to the ones in the Republic of India in the year 20 20. On behalf of both the State and the Petitioners, draft petitions and make oral arguments based on the above information.
