3RD Kiit Intra Mock Trial Competition PDF

I
TEAM CODE- 308
3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019
BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSIONS

AT AMINABAD
STATE OF AMINABAD
(PROSECUTION)
V.
CORTENA
(DEFENCE)
UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SESSIONS JUDGE
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION

II
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of content …………. ………………………………………..…… …… II
List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………… III
Index of Authorities ……………………………………………… ………… IV
Table of Cases ………………………………………………………………. V
Books ………………………………………………………………………… VI
Websites …………………………………………………………………….. VI
Statues ……………………………………………………………………… VI
Statement of Jurisdiction …………………………………………………… VII
Statement of Facts …………………………………………………………. VIII
Statement of charges ……………………………………………………… IX
Summary Of Arguments …………………………………………………… X
Arguments Advanced ……………………………………………………… 1
ISSUE -1
Whether Cortena is Guilty of Culpable Homicide ? ………………………. 1
ISSUE -2
Whether Cortena is Guilty of Criminal Offence ? ………………………….. 6
ISSUE -3
Whether the Cortena is Guilty of Murder ?…………………………………. 12
Prayer ……………………………………………………………………… 16
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

III
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AIR All Indian Report

ALL Allahabad High Court
CriLJ/ CrLJ Criminal Law Journal
Cr.P.C Code Of Criminal Procedure
IPC Indian Penal Code
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Cases
SCJ Supreme Court Journal
SCR Supreme Court Reporter
Sec. Section
V. Versus
Ors. Own Recognizance
Anr. Another
Er. Exclamation
Acj Amended Consent Judgment
BLJR Bihar Law Journal Report
Ed. Edition
Anr . Another
Mad. Madras series
BOMHC Bombay High Court
Supp. Supplement
MPC Martian Penal Code
Manu. Manupatra

IV
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
TABLE OF CASES :
1. Shyam Behari vs State Of U.P on 5 October, 1956
2. Subramaniam vs State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr on 13 May, 2009
3. Mulakh Raj Etc vs Satish Kumar And Others on 10 April, 1992
4. Bhupinder Singh vs. State of Punjab 1988 CrLJ SC.
5. Sreenivasan Alias Sreeni vs State Of Kerala on 7 November, 2005
6. Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakker vs State Of Gujarat on 19 March, 1964AIR
1563, 1964 SCR (7) 361
7. Moti Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh on 23 January,1964 AIR 900, 1964
SCR (1) 688
8. Sanku Sreedharan Kottukallil ... vs State Of Kerala on 3 April, 1969
9. R. v. Grimwood, 1962-3 All ER 285.,
10. Rita Devi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2000 ACJ 801 (SC)
11. State vs . Regan Pradhan on 19 January, 2019
12. Mohammed Arif vs. State Of Uttaranchal (2009) 11 SCC 497.
13. State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr on 23 April, 1963 AIR
1850, 1964 SCR (3) 297
14. K.P. Rajan Alias Antony vs State Of Kerala on 13 February, 1991CriLJ 1859
15. Sherras v. De Rutzen [1895] 1 QB 918 Divisional Court
16. Suresh Chandra Bahri v state of Bihar , 1995 Supp(1) SCC 80 : 1995 SCC (cri) 60 .
17. The State Of Uttar Pradesh And ... vs Babu Ram Upadhya1961 AIR 751, 1961 SCR (2) 679
18. State Of Haryana vs Sher Singh & Ors on 24 February, 1981
19. Amitava Banerjee @ Amit @ Bappa ... vs State Of West Bengal on 17 August, 2011
20. Anil Kumar Vitthal Shete & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 28 April, 2006
21. Dinesh vs. The State of Maharashtra (05.05.2010 - BOMHC) : MANU/MH/0621/2010
22. R. v. Mohan ,[1994] 2 SCR 9 , 1994 canLii 80 (SCC)
23. Sarju Prasad vs. State Of Bihar on 20August , 19664 AIR 19665 SC 843, 1965 (0) BLJR 316 ,
1965 CriLJ 766
24. Bashir vs State on 19 March, 1953

V
25. Vullappa v. Bheema Row 43 Ind. Cas. 578 : 41 M 156 : A I R 1918 Mad. 136 : 19 Cr L J 162
: 6 L W 794 : 33 M L J 729 : (1918) M W N 81.,
26. Amar kumar vs. State of Haryana (2004,CriL 1399 SC)
27. Abhayanand Mishra vs The State Of Bihar on 24 April, 1961 AIR 1698, 1962 SCR (2) 241
28. Queen Empress v. Soshi Bhushan (1) (1889) I.L.R. 12 Mad. 151.
29. Abhyanand Mishra vs. State of Bihar (AIR 1961 SC 1698)
30. Staples vs. United states , 511 US 600 (1994)Orient paper mills vs. State Of Orissa And Ors.
On 6 November,2006
31. Kartar Singh v. State Of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569.
32. Jai Prakash v. Delhi Administration (1991) 2 SCC 32 , 1991 (1) SCALE 11
33. State of UP v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, AIR 1992 SC 840
34. Bakshish Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1971 SC 2016
35. Ashok Kumar and others vs. State of UP on 19 march 2018
36. Subhramaniyam vs. State of Tamilnadu and Anr on 13 may 2009
37. State of Rajasthan vs. Om Prakash Sharma on 21 July 2008
38. Smt.Ira Juneja and Anr.vs. State and Anr on 12 November,2003
39. Muthaiah vs. State of Karnataka on 21 januyary, 2014
40. State of Bihar vs.lalan Singh on 20 august 2008
41. Kalari Madathil Unni vs. State of Kerala on 22 April, 1966
42. Anil@Raju Namdev Patil vs. Administration of Daman and Diu on 24 November 2006
43. Manoj kumar @ Fantus And Anr vs. State of Bihar on 2nd july 1991
BOOKS:
1. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 33rd Ed. (2011)
2. P S A PILLAI’S , Criminal Law, 13th edition K I Vibhute
3. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Law of Evidence, 22nd Ed. (2006)
4. Dr. Avtar Singh, Principle of the law of Evidence, 22nd edition (2016)
5. Abhinandan malik, Law of Evidence, 7th edition (2017)
6. Medical Jurisprudence by Raju & Jhala
7. H.W.V. Cox's Medical jurisprudence and Toxicology by Dr. Bernard Knight, 5th Edn.
8. Kelkar, R.V. Criminal Procedure, (5th Ed. 2011)
9. K D.Gaur , “Textbook on THE INDIAN PENIAL CODE”, 4th Ed.,

VI
10. hamsul Huda , ‘ The Principals Of Law Of Crimes’
STATUTES:
1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1973)
2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 18 of 1872)
3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)
WEBSITES:
1. http://www.findlaw.com
2. http://www.manupatra.co.in/AdvancedLegalSearch.aspx
3. http://www.scconline.com
4. https://indiankanoon.org/

VII

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to try the instant matter under Section 177 read with Section 209
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Section 177:
‘177. Ordinary place of inquiry and trial-
Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it
was committed.’
Read with Section 209:
‘ 209. Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable exclusively by it- When in a
case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused appears or is brought before the
Magistrate and it appears to the Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of
Session, he shall-
(a) commit the case to the Court of Session;
(b) subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the accused to custody during,
and until the conclusion of, the trial;
(c) send to that Court the record of the case and the documents and articles, if any, which are to
be produced in evidence;
(d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the commitment of the case to the Court of Session.’

VIII
STATEMENT OF FACTS
STATEMENT OF FACTS
 Ms. Alexa Chaubey, aged about 34 years is a businesswomen and an artist hails from Aminabad,
Capital of Republic of mars. She had a boutique marriage bureau business. At a very young age
she had earned money and respect across all the spectrum. Her place of operation and registered
head Office was in Aminabad, were she had enrolled her childhood friend Mrs. Tai her business
partner .
 she was married to Mr. Siri Govind , aged about 36 years , in 2013 and their was apparently a
happy wedlock and they lived together in L-2, first floor, Lala park, Aminabad. Mr. Siri worked for
Pohagram, an artificial intelligence company and was involved in developing a softwear to recreat
a Human face using a DNA .They also had Domestic Help, Ms. Cortena who lived round the clock
with them .
 On 8/04/2018, Alexa had come early from office and using her spare key she went inside only to
find her Husband in a compromising Position with Cortena. Both of them exchanged heading
argument and had verbal fight but ultimately both tried to resolve the issue thinking of societal and
parental pressure . Alexa had to visit a Therapist Dr. Jimmy as she went under grate trauma after
that incident and was on medication for depression .
 Coretena had an elder brother Mycroft, Who was a habitual offender. On one occasion Mr.siri was
travellig to New York for some work on 02/10/2018. Alexa went for morning walk and her
domestic help (Cortena ) went to fetch the daily Grocery and came at around 9.00 Am. After
returning Home she started to prepare brake fast for Alexa . Alexa after returning from walk she
went for her bath and had her brake fast. When Alexa was leaving for her office she felt
nauseating . Coretna suddenly brought her a glass of water . and some tablet . That day Alexa
decided to work from home and asked Cortena to get some files from her office which was roughly
around thirty minutes from her house .
 On Cortena’s return at around 5:15 P.M, She went to check on Alexa and saw her sleeping in her
room. At around 7:00 P.M thinking it was quite late for Alexa to sleep, Cortena went inside her
room to wake her up it is when She found that she is dead . On 02/10/2018, Mrs. Tai lodged an FIR
against Ms. Cortena, alleging Culpable homicide amounting to murder .

IX
STATEMENT OF CHARGES
STATEMENT OF CHARGES
CHARGE -1
Cortena is has been charged under Section - 302 of the Martian Penal Code,1860 for
the crime of Murder .

X
SUMMARY ARGUMENTS
SUMMARY ARGUMENT
ISSUE -1
WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE ?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble court that the accused, Ms. Cortena is guilty of committing
culpable homicide amounting to murder as she had committed the crime with full intent of Murder held
in it on the 2nd of October 2018 . The accused had all the knowledge to carry out a successful Murder
as she was the Domestic help for Alexa. And while committing said crime the accused had committed
such act which cause the death of the Human being, thus fulfilling all of the elements of section-299 of
the Martian penal Code, 1860.
ISSUE -2
WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF CRIMINAL OFFENCE ?
It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble court that the accused, Mr. Cortena is guilty of Committing
Criminal offence. She had committed the crime with all the element of the crime defined in the criminal
jurisprudence I.e , Motive, Intention , Preparation ,Attempt and Guilty Mind, thus fulfilling all of the
elements of Criminal Jurisprudence .
ISSUE -3
WHETHER THE CORTENA IS GUILTY OF MURDER ?
It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the accused, Mrs.Cortena is guilty of committing
murder. The mode of death caused by choked her neck. The accused had the requisite mens rea to
commit said crime, and he even had a motive to carry out said act. According to the autopsy report
there was interference with respiration. Hence it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime of
Murder was indeed committed by the accused.

1
KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
ARUMENTS ADVANCE
ISSUE-1
WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE ?
It is humble contended that Cortena (hereinafter referred to as the accused) is guilty of Culpable
Homicide To Murder under Section - 299 of the Martian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as
MPC ). It is to be noted that the essential element of Section- 299 are as follow :
 There must be a death of a human being.[1.1]

 Death must be done by doing an act by the culprit.[1.2]
 The act of causing death must be done:[1.3]
1. With the intention of causing death.[1.3(1)]

2. With the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death,or[1.3(2)]
3. With the knowledge that such act is likely to cause death.[1.3(3)]
So, these conditions must be fulfilled to invoke Section-299. Court observed that though an act may
cause death but it will not amount to Culpable homicide unless all the above mentioned essentials are
satisfied. These essential make very clear that the said section demands for both physical and mental
element to constitute the crime1.
1.1 CAUSING DEATH OF HUMAN BEING :
In order to hold a person liable under the offence of culpable homicide,there must be a death of a living
human being .By the word human being, it means either a living man,women, child or infant.
Explanation 3 of the section says that the causing of the death of child in the mother’s would not be a
homicide. But where their death of the child took place and some part of the child has been brought
forth,though the child may not have breathed or been completely born in such case it would amount to
culpable homicide, death is caused by doing some act by the culprit.
1
Shyam Behari vs State Of U.P on 5 October, 1956

2
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
In the present case Ms. Corenta (hereinafter refereed to as the accused) chocked the neck of Ms. Alexa
(hereinafter refereed to as the victim) and also closed her mouth which was evident from the Autopsy
report .The blue mark in victim neck it clear that neck was chocked it was down by using a cloth which
is clear from the circumstance . The Autopsy clearly mention that death of the victim cause asphyxia.
Hence it is clear from above statement that there was a death of living human caused by doing some act
by the accused.
at the time of asphyxia there should be hybakia should be found. (Hybakia means the oxygen particles
will be lesser in number in the blood). Further the face and head will be found distended Synochiam
with numerous petiole should be found. Further there should be mucous in the mouth and throat2.
the heart in asphyxia, specifically right chambers, is always found full of dark venous blood. This is
important to note as usually with death, blood disappears from the heart. The venous system of
circulation, because of back pressure, is always found distended with blood. The blood in heart and
veins is not only dark blue but also liquid and remains liquid..The internal organs and mucous
membrane also present the general signs of congestion.This congestion has to be looked for and has to
be found in all cases of genuine asphyxia3.the length of time for which pressure on the neck must be
maintained to cause death is very variable, from zero seconds to several minutes. The statement
regarding length of time he stated that no dogmatic statement of time of two minutes or three minutes
can be made4.asphyxia by violence, it is stated that if the breathing is interfered with for a sufficient
period of time unconsciousness and death will supervene5.
1.2 BY DOING AN ACT :-
Death must be followed by some kind of act by the culprit . An act must be of certain gravity which
must result in death or put someone’s life to such an extent that the person would definitely die.
Basically act should contain a high degree of violence against deceased. Further, there are situations in
which death might be caused by effect of words, in that case also it will be included under an act.
Liability will be equal as same as in the case of physical assault.
2
Subramaniam vs State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr on 13 May, 2009
3
Medical Jurisprudence by Raju & Jhala in Chapter XXV death from asphyxia and death from drowning at p.226
4
H.W.V. Cox's Medical jurisprudence and Toxicology by Dr. Bernard Knight, 5th Edn. in Chapter 1 at p. 207
5
Mulakh Raj Etc vs Satish Kumar And Others on 10 April, 1992

3
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
Corteena (Victim) who was domestic help when Alexa felt nausea suddenly she offered some
medicine to her were it make evident that she knows that Alexa will suffered with that problem because
she offered her mushroom in her in brake fast. She was a helper means she don’t had any proper idea
about medicine. The Autopsy make it clear that the murder took place 5-8 hours before and at that
time cortena was present home she did the act. As she want to make it evident that she down the act for
which she herself created a fact that she went fetch file from Alexa office . Cortena in her statement
make it clear that she met her brother same day itself and guard had seen make that some unknown
person went to Alexa house that day which means cortena asked her brother to come to Alexa house
and help her make her away from the crime which she had committed. The blue mark in the neck of
Alexa make it clear that some one has chocked her neck by using a cloth. Hence, from above statement
it is clear that Alexa had down the act foe which alexa is died.
Court observed that “the view has been approved by the framers of the code who said that the willful
doing of that which is known to be likely to produce evil, manifests the mens rea essential to criminal
responsibility; the evil produced is death; the efficient cause,the words spoken6”.
The act which caused death must have been committed by the indictee : (1) with the intention of causing death
or (2) with the intention of causing such (body) injury as is likely to cause death or (3) with the knowledge that
the offender is likely to by such act to cause death7. As stated before, to find that the accused did not know
the nature and quality of his act is, in part, only another way of finding that he was ignorant as to some
fact constituting an ingredient of the crime8.
1.3 INTENTION OF CAUSING DEATH :
In order to attract the offence of culpable homicide, one of the most important mental element is
intention. There must be a desire of the accused that by doing an act, death shall follow from it. Person
behind the guilt must have intention to cause some other persons death by doing an act or a bodily
injury which is likely cause the death, I.e., without guilty mind there shall be the no offence of culpable
homicide. Without intention, culprit will not be held liable. On the other hand, English law has different
approach and it says that if a person cause death accidentally during the commission of any unlawful
6
Bhupinder Singh vs. State of Punjab 1988 CrLJ SC.
7
Sreenivasan Alias Sreeni vs State Of Kerala on 7 November, 2005
8
Glanville Williams in his book 'Criminal Law", The General Part, 2nd Edn., places the relevant aspect in the correct
perspective thus, at p. 516,Dahyabhai Chhaganbhai Thakker vs State Of Gujarat on 19 March, 1964AIR 1563, 1964 SCR
(7) 361
4

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
act, then in such case he shall be liable for manslaughter or murder as per the case. Also, as a general
rule, every sane person is ‘presumed to intend’ the necessary and probable consequence of his act; and
this presumption of law will prevail unless from consideration of all the evidence the court entertains a
reasonable doubt as to whether such intention existed9.
Coretna (hereinafter refereed as accused) inention was started when she got position’s Mushroom from
the grocery shop and severed it in brake fast of Alexa I.e the jingla Mushroom after which it felt nausea.
As Cortena started to fall for Mr.siri, where they where caught in a compromising position by alexa
after which also alexa didn’t separate from Mr.siri. To continue relationship with Mr.siri she killed
alexa. She also served some medicine to alexa. Therefore, from above statement it is clear that she had
the intention to kill Alexa .
Court opined that to prove the intention is a difficult task so, it can be determined through motive,
conduct e.c.t10. The intent is the essence of the crime while, where the death of another is caused, the
necessity is to prove malice aforethought which is supplied in law by proving intent to do grievous
bodily harm11. The law is that in the case of an ordinary normal man it does not matter what that man
contemplates at the moment at all. The test is whether what he did was of a kind where death might
well have been the natural and probable result of what he did"12.If the dominant intention of the act of
felony is to kill any particular person then such killing is not an accidental murder13."Whoever causes
death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily
injury as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death,
commits the offence of culpable homicide14."
1.4 KNOWLEDGE :-
Where offender knows that he is likely by such act can cause the death of some person. In this case,
maybe he does not have intention but he must have clear knowledge that the commission of this act can
cause the death of another person.
9
K.D.Gaur , “Textbook on THE INDIAN PENIAL CODE”, 4th Ed., Universal Law Publishing Co.Pvt.Ltd., P.443 .
10
Moti Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh on 23 January,1964 AIR 900, 1964 SCR (1) 688
11
Sanku Sreedharan Kottukallil ... vs State Of Kerala on 3 April, 1969
12
R. v. Grimwood, 1962-3 All ER 285.,
13
Rita Devi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2000 ACJ 801 (SC)
14
State vs . Regan Pradhan on 19 January, 2019

5
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
Cortena (hereinafter referred as to victim) had the knowledge that Alexa was restricted from eating
Mushroom but still she served Mushroom in her brake fast. Cortena also know that Mr.siri is the
husband of Alexa but still she got in a compromising position and also had the motive to continue the
realtion with him .When Coretna was chocking Alexa neck she had the knowledge that the act can
cause death of the person. She also gave some medicine to Cortena where she know that she doesnt
have enough idea about medical science but still she served medicine. Hence, from above it is clear that
she had the knowledge of all the act what she was doing .
If a person during the performance of some act expects a death to be its consequence, or a bodily injury
which is likely to cause death or knows that death is likely consequence of his act and in each case if
death happens, then it shall be a case of culpable homicide15.A view to obtaining the evidence of any
person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or privy to the offence, tender a
pardon to such person on condition of his making a full and true disclosure of the whole of the
circumstances within his knowlege relative to the offence and to every other person concerned, whether
as principal or abettor16.if the act was done with the knowlege that it is likely to cause death, but
without any intention to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. If the act
was done with the intention of causing death or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death17."There is a presumption that mens rea, an evil intention, or a knowledge of the wrongfulness of
the act, isan essential ingredient in every offence; but that presumption is liable to be displaced either
by the words of the statute creating the offence or by the subject-matter with which it deals, and both
must be considered18."
Therefore, the Prosecution humbly submits that the Trial Court would be justified in convicting the
accused if it is shown by the evidence on record that he had participated in the culpable homicide.
15
Mohammed Arif vs. State Of Uttaranchal (2009) 11 SCC 497.
16
State Of Andhra Pradesh vs Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr on 23 April, 1963 AIR 1850, 1964 SCR (3) 297
17
K.P. Rajan Alias Antony vs State Of Kerala on 13 February, 1991CriLJ 1859
18
Sherras v. De Rutzen [1895] 1 QB 918 Divisional Court

6
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
ISSUE - II
WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF the Criminal Offence ?
Crimes can be broken down into elements, which the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable
doubt. Criminal elements are set forth in criminal statutes, or cases in jurisdictions that allow for
common-law crimes. In the area of criminal law there are specific elements of conduct that need to be
shown to have existed at the time of an offense.The elements are as follow:-
2.1 Motive of the offender
2.2 Intention of the offender
2.3 Attempt of the offender
2.4 preparation of the offender
2.5 Guilty mind of the offender
2.1 MOTIVE OF THE OFFENDER :-
The circumstantial evidence make it evident that the accused had the motive to continue the
relationship with Mr. Siri (victim’s husband ) . This is further stated by Cortena ( accused ) that she and
Mr siri the husband of the victim had Relation and after they caught by Alex they resolve the matter
themself and decided not to get separated from her husband19 . Therefore to save the relation with Mr.
Siri she had decided to kill Alexa.
Section -8 of the Indian Evidence Act , 1872 ( here in after refereed to as ‘Evidence Act’ ) state that any
fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a Motive or Preparation for any act fact in issue of relevant
fact 20
. Motive is a psychological Fact and the accused motive will have to be proved by circumstantial
evidence21 . The existence of a motive from the point of view of evidence , would be relevant fact in
every criminal case22 .Evidence of motive help the court to connect the accused with the deed .
Evidence of motive is figures in almost every Criminal Case . Therefore ,when motive is proved ,the
Court has to consider it and see whether it is adequate23.Motive for the commission of an offence no
doubt assumes greater importance in cases resting on circumstantial evidence than those in which direct
evidence regarding commission of the offence is available24.
19
Exhibit - 3, 1st page (B) first lane and Exhibit -7 , case details para 3rd .
20
Indian evidence Act ,1872
21
Suresh Chandra Bahri v state of Bihar , 1995 Supp(1) SCC 80 : 1995 SCC (cri) 60 .
22
The State Of Uttar Pradesh And ... vs Babu Ram Upadhya1961 AIR 751, 1961 SCR (2) 679
23
State Of Haryana vs Sher Singh & Ors on 24 February, 1981
24
Amitava Banerjee @ Amit @ Bappa ... vs State Of West Bengal on 17 August, 2011

7

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
The Courts look for some motive in circumstantial evidence because it provides an additional link, to
the Court that it is the accused who has committed the crime25.
The case in hand is based upon circumstantial evidence . In dealing with the circumstance evidence ,
the apex court since 1952 till date has consistently held that the following condition must be said to be
fully establishment on circumstantial evidence :
1. The circumstance from which the conclusion of guilty is to be drawn must or should be
and not merely ‘may be’ fully established .
2. The fact so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilty of the
accused that is to be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty .
3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved , and
5. There must be chain of evidences so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the
conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must that in all human probability
the act must have been done by the accused26
2.2 Intention of the offender:-
It is evident from the fact that she had the intention to kill alexa as she had relationship with Mr. Siri
and on 08.04.2018 they where in compromising position during that time alexa entered into the house
using a spare key, caught them27. After that Mr.siri and Alexa had verbal fight and arguments but they
resolved among them and they decided not to get separated . As coretena want to live a happy life with
Mr.siri and alexa was not agreeing to get separated therefore she decided to kill her .Cortena on
02.10.2018 prepared brake fast for alexa and after that she felt nauseating . It was clear that she gave
alexa Mushroom28 to eat when she knew that alexa was not allowed to eat mushroom as she was under
the treatment of depression . Later, on 29. 09. 2018 alexa had suspected that cortena and Mr.Siri are
stll meeting and going behind her therefore cortena decided to kill alexa as she was not able to continue
the relationship with Mr.siri .
25
Anil Kumar Vitthal Shete & Ors vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 28 April, 2006
26
Dinesh vs. The State of Maharashtra (05.05.2010 - BOMHC) : MANU/MH/0621/2010
27
Case study page -2 , para -1.
28
Exhibit - 2, autopsy report page-2 (d) point no -3.

8
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
Intention occupies a symbolic place in the criminal law. As the highest form In of MR it applies to
murder, the gravest crime in the criminal justice system. criminal law, intent is a subjective state of mind
that must accompany the acts of certain crimes to constitute a violation. Intent is defined in law by the
ruling in R v Mohan (1975)29 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence."
The words ‘under such circumstances' refer to acts which would introduce a defence to a charge of
murder,But if you have an act done with a sufficiently guilty intention and knowledge and in
circumstances which do not from their nature afford a defence to a charge of murder, and if the act is of
such a nature as would have caused death in the usual course of events30. In the following situation the
servant(cortena ) know about the fact that mushroom was given and the blue line in the neck provide
that some one has choked Alexa neck and it is a unusual act which will lead to death she knew that still
knew that it could not be accidental therefore, it is clear that she had the intention to kill her.
The intention, that is an ingredient of many of the offence, is the intention formed by a person himself
committing the offence; it is a personal matter. It is the intention immediately behind the act done by
the doer31. In arriving at this conclusion they discussed the meaning of the word 'intent' as used by
Macaulay and the other Law Commissioners in drafting the Penal Code, taking account of the fact that they
regarded the maximum that everyone must be taken to intend the natural consequences of his acts as a
fiction which should not be recognized in the Penal Code32.
2.3 Attempt of the offender:-

It evident from the circumstances that she Attempted to kill Alex , from the following circumstance
first circumstance that she served Jingla Mushroom33 in brake fast which is poisonous mushroom
which could lead to nausea and vomiting, muscle weakness, drowsiness e.c.t and Alexa after eating she
felt nauseating . After that Cortena suddenly offer some medicine34 and water, it resembles that she had
the knowledge about the mushroom . she was also aware of the fact that she was under the treatment for
depression and she was restricted from mushroom as it could lead to unconsciousness35 .
29
R. v. Mohan ,[1994] 2 SCR 9 , 1994 canLii 80 (SCC)
30
Sarju Prasad vs. State Of Bihar on 20August , 19664 AIR 19665 SC 843, 1965 (0) BLJR 316 , 1965 CriLJ 766
31
Bashir vs State on 19 March, 1953
32
Vullappa v. Bheema Row 43 Ind. Cas. 578 : 41 M 156 : A I R 1918 Mad. 136 : 19 Cr L J 162 : 6 L W 794 : 33 M L J
729 : (1918) M W N 81.,
33
Exhibit -3 ,statement under section -161 of CRPC, page -4 (I) 3rd line .
34
Case study ,2nd page last Paragraph 6th line
35
Exhibit -3 , Statement under Section - 161 of CRPC ,page - (4) (I)
.
9
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
That day Cortena also meat with her brother who was a habitual offender and Guard has testified that
on the same day one unknown person went to Alexa house . The Blue mark36 in the neck make it
evident that some one had choked her neck and the abnormal and swollen in mouth make it evident that
some one had closed her mouth as she cant shout for help therefore it make it clear that 2 person were
present in house at the time of death of Alexa . Hence, Cortena had attempt to kill Alexa .
An attempt to commit a crime is itself a crime . According to salmond an attempt is an act of such a
nature that it is itself evidence of the criminal intent with which it is done . once an act enters the arena
of attempt, criminal liability begins, because attempt takes the offender very close to the completion of
a crime. It has to be distinguished from intention to commit offence and preparation.Attempt means and
act which if not prevented would have resulted in full consummation of act attempted.Attempt begins
the preparation ends37. Attempt is the direct movement towards the commission after preparation are
made the dividing line between a mere preparation and an attempt is sometimes thin and has to be
decided on the facts of each case38.
2.4 preparation of the offender :-
Yes, she had made all the preparation to kill Alexa , she got mushroom from the market39 which was a
poisonous one and she gave some medicine immediately to Alexa she was domestic helper and it is
obvious in nature she must not be so highly educated that she can understand the medicine which is to
be given . she had only brother in her family and who was a habitual offender40 and on that day she
meat her brother for sometime where they planed how to execute the plan .It is evident that from the
circumstance that one cloth41 was used to chock her neck and Cortena was well aware about the house
or the things in house and the other one chocked her mouth as she can shout for any help. From the
investigation it is clear that 2 person42 where present in the house and on that guard show 43
one
unknown person went to Alexa house and cortena also meat her brother hence it is evident that
unknown person was cortena brother . Preparation is the stage among the stages of crime. It means to
36
Exhibit -2 , Autopsy report ,page -2 ,(B) .
37
Amar kumar vs. State of Haryana (2004,CriL 1399 SC)
38
Abhyanand Mishra vs. State of Bihar (AIR 1961 SC 1698)
39
Case fact Page-2
40
Case fact, page -2
41
Autopsy report ,page -2
42
161 statement , investigating officer
43
161 statement , Guard
10
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
arrange the necessary resources for the execution of the intentional criminal act. Intention and preparation
alone are not enough to constitute a crime.The preparation was complete when he had prepared the
application for the purpose of submission to the University. The moment he dispatched it, he entered
the realm of attempting to commit the offence of 'cheating'44. There is a thin line between the
preparation for and an attempt to commit an offence. Undoubtedly, a culprit first intends to commit the
offence, then makes preparation for committing it and thereafter attempts to commit the offence. If the
attempt succeeds, he has committed the offence; if it fails due to reasons beyond his control, he is said
to have attempted to commit the offence. Attempt to commit an offence, therefore, can be said to begin
when the preparations45.
2.5 Guilty mind of the offender

Coretna (accused) served mushroom46 in her breakfa/st after which she felt nausea and after which she
gave some tablets to her the act which is down is a physical activity which is harm to another person .
As she was a domestic help where it is obvious that didn’t have any knowledge about the medical
science which was a wrongful act that makes up the physical action of a crime . She also shocked Alexa
(victim) neck by using a cloth and cortena also chocked her mouth47 which is significance from the
Autopsy Report therefore the act which was down shows that she committed a guilty act where the act
alone which make the act an Offence . Cortena was in Love with Mr.siri husband of the victim which
was caught by Alexa after which husband and wife compromise and continues the relation48 . As
Cortena had the motive to continue relationship with Mr.siri and which was not possible as Alexa not
decided to get separated for which she decided to kill Alexa after which can continue the relationship
with him . It evident from the circumstance that she had the intention to kill Alexa . Cortena had also
the knowledge that Alexa was restricted from having mushroom after which she will suffer different
health issue after which also she served mushroom to her . Hence, from above mentioned circumstance
it is clear that she had intention , knowledge and also know about the consequence of her act and the act
is not down in a negligent manner . Therefore, both Mens Rea and Actus Reus is present . A mens rea
refers to the state of mind statutorily required in order to convict a particular defendant of a particular
crime. Establishing the mens rea of an offender is usually necessary to prove guilt in a criminal trial49.
44
Abhayanand Mishra vs The State Of Bihar on 24 April, 1961 AIR 1698, 1962 SCR (2) 241
45
Queen Empress v. Soshi Bhushan (1) (1889) I.L.R. 12 Mad. 151.
46
Exhibit -3,Statements under Section-161 CRPC, Page-4 (I)
47
Exhibit -2 , Autopsy Report, page-2 (B)
48
Case Study Page-2, Para-1
49
Staples vs. United states , 511 US 600 (1994)

11
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
The Division Bench further conclusively held that "in other words mens rea constitutes a condition
precedent for levy of penalty"50.Almost all the offence under IPC are qualified by one or the other such
as ‘Wrongful gain or Wrongful loss, dishonestly , fraudulently , reason to believe , criminal knowledge
or intention intentional cooperation , voluntarily, malignantly,wantonly,maliciously. All theses words
indicate the blameworthy mental condition required at the time of commission of the offence, in order
to constitute an offence51. The court held that the element of mens rea must be read into statutory penal
provisions unless a statue either expressly or by necessary implication rules it out52. knowledge, as
contrast to intention , signifies a state of mental realization in which the mind is a passive recipient of
certain ideas or impressions arising in it, while intention connotes a conscious state of mind in which
mental faculties are summoned into action for the deliberate, prior conceived and perceived
consequences53.
"Criminal guilt would attach to a man for violations of criminal law. However, the rule is not absolute
and is subject to limitations indicated in the Latin maxim, actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. It
signifies that there can be no crime without a guilty mind. To make a person criminally accountable, it
must be proved that an act, which is forbidden by law, has been caused by his conduct, and that the
conduct was accompanied by a legally blameworthy attitude of mind. Thus, there are two components
of every crime, a physical element and a mental element, usually called actus reus and mens rea
respectively54”. "It is a general principle of criminal law that a person may be convicted of a crime
unless the prosecution have proved beyond reasonable doubt both (a) that he caused a certain event or
that responsibility is to be attributed to him for the existence of a certain state of affairs, which is
forbidden by criminal law, and (b) that he had a defined state of mind in relation to the causing of the
event or the existence of the state of affairs. The event, or state of affairs, is called the actus reus ad the
state of mind the mens rea of the crime55."
Therefore, the Prosecution humbly submits that the Trial Court would be justified in convicting the accused if it
is shown by the evidence on record that all the element of crime I present and guilty of the crime .
50
Orient paper mills vs. State Of Orissa And Ors. On 6 November,2006
51
Shamsul Huda , ‘ The Principals Of Law Of Crimes’ ,( Tagore Law Lectures 1902 ), Eastern Book Co, Lucknow,Reprint
2011 , ch 5: Mens Rea, and ch 6 : words used in the code to Denote Mens Rea.
52
Kartar Singh v. State Of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569.
53
Jai Prakash v. Delhi Administration (1991) 2 SCC 32 , 1991 (1) SCALE 114.
54
principle of criminal jurisprudence stated in Criminal Law by K.D.Gaur
55
Criminal Law - J.C.Smith, Brian Hogan

12

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
ISSUE -III
WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF MURDER ?

It is humbly contended that the accused is guilty for committing the offence of murder under sec302,
IPC. Sec 302 prescribes the punishment for committing murder. In order to bring a successful
conviction under this charge, however, it is pertinent to refer to sec 300, IPC which elucidates the
essentials of murder.
A person is guilty of murder if he intentionally causes the death of a person or causes such interference
with respiration as he knows, is likely to cause death of that person or causes such Asphyxia, which in
the ordinary course of nature results into death or commits an act so dangerous that it must, in all
probability cause death of that person.56 The Prosecution humbly contends that both, the actus reus [3.1]
and the mens rea [3.2] of the crime are established in the instant matter, negating that it was not an act
of accidental [3.3].
3.1 ACTUS REUS OF MURDER IS PROVEN :-
Actus reus is any wrongful act57. Thus, in a case of murder, actus reus would be the physical conduct of
the accused that cases death of the victim. In the instant case, the actus reus is established by way of
witness statements [A], autopsy report [B].
A. Witness Statements
Bearing in mind that it is not for the prosecution to meet any and every hypothesis suggested by the
accused, however extravagant and fanciful it might be58, it is humbly before this Hon’ble Court that the
circumstantial evidence in the instant matter shows that within all human probability, the act must have
been done by the accused.59 Complainant (PW2) is closest friend of victim. She knew her since
childhood days and she understand her most. According to her confessional statement accused (Ms.
Cortena) has been working as a domestic help for victim since one year. She was unmarried. On the
date 9th april 2018 when she come to the office she was very upset. After asking again and again victim
told her a husband and Cortena relationship.
56
Sec 300,IPC
57
Aiyar, P Ramanatha, The Law Lexicon, p. 49 (2nd ed 2006)
58
State of UP v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, AIR 1992 SC 840
59
Bakshish Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1971 SC 2016

13
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
She wanted to divorce her husband but the complainant persuaded her to give her marriage one more
chance. On the date of 2nd October 2018 victim informed PW2 in the afternoon that she was not feeling
well and she would be able to come to the office and she will work from home. Lastly she said that she
sending Cortena to fetch some files. In the evening she received a call from Cortena that Ms. Alexa is
unconscious. After when she hurried her home she found her unconscious and then she saw a blue
mark on Ms. Alexa’s neck and immediately she called ambulance. Complainant Mrs. Tai is the eye
witness of the case. Not only the complainant but also the investigation officer and Dr. Jimmy and Dr.
Strange Sheikh were said that the Cortena murder Mrs. Alexa because of money.60
In a case where murder was caused by asphyxia the witnesses did not saw the accused at the murder
time but in that time only the accused present in the victim house. And witnesses found a blue mark on
the neck of victim. their evidence was held to be as good as that of eye witnesses and conviction was
upheld.61
B. AUTOPSY
The post mortem report becomes important in cases where the cause of death by Asphyxia is to be
established and is a matter of controversy62. Moreover, it is not possible for the Prosecution in to
explain each and every injury suffered by the victim. Here asphyxia was conduct by the account of
choking.63 Here in this case autopsy on Mrs. Alexa clear that a blue mark on her neck and some Jingla
Mushroom of mushroom which is a rare and possessed certain psychedelic effects and minute traces of
pills also found on her stomach.64 However, for the sake of convenience, the Prosecution feels obliged
to assist this Hon’ble Court in understanding the complexity of the post mortem report.
60
Exhibit 3, statement under section 161 Crpc, p1
61
Ashok Kumar and others vs. State of UP on 19 march 2018
62
Subhramaniyam vs. State of Tamilnadu and Anr on 13 may 2009
63
State of Rajasthan vs. Om Prakash Sharma on 21 July 2008
64
Exhibit 2, autopsy report, p 1 & 2

14
ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
3.2 MENSREA OF MURDER IS ESTABLISHED :-
Mens rea is considered as guilty intention or mind65, which is proved or generalized from the acts of the
accused.66A fundamental principle of criminal law is that mens rea is an essential element of every
offence and no crime can be said to have been committed if the mind of the person doing the act is not
guilty.67
It is submitted that the intention to kill is established [A] in light of clear-cut motive of the accused[B].
A. The accused had intention to kill

It is presumed that every sane person intends the result that his action normally produces and if a person
tightly or forcefully hits another persons body part, and death occurs as a result, the intention of the
accused can be no other than to take the life of the victim and the offence committed amounts to
murder.68 .
Moreover, the intention to kill is not required in every case, mere knowledge that natural and applicant
consequences of an act would be death will sufficiency for a conviction under s. 302 of IPC.69 The
intention to kill can be inferred from the murder and nature of the injuries caused to the victim.70Here in
this case the accused had intention to kill Mrs. Alexa that’s why accused gave mushroom in her
breakfast after that when victim felt nauseating in that time brought suddenly a glass of water with
medicine. And doctor advised to the victim to stay-off with some mushroom. And here accused as a
domestic help she had an idea about it. In the fact it was mentioned that accused had some money
problem. According to the autopsy report there was blue mark on victim neck. This type symbol shows
that when one person choked another person neck very forcefully. Here the person cannot take the
oxygen clearly and the blood blocked in a particular place and here death occurs.71 As a result and it
answers to culpable homicide not amounting to murder(section 300) and is murder. It is logical to
conclude that she intended to cause the death of the victim.72
65
Smt.Ira Juneja and Anr.vs. State and Anr on 12 November,2003
66
Muthaiah vs. State of Karnataka on 21 januyary, 2014
67
State of Bihar vs.lalan Singh on 20 august 2008
68
Kalari Madathil Unni vs. State of Kerala on 22 April, 1966
69
Anil@Raju Namdev Patil vs. Administration of Daman and Diu on 24 November 2006
70
Manoj kumar @ Fantus And Anr vs. State of Bihar on 2nd july 1991
71
Ibdi
72
Ibdi

15

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
B. The accused had motive
Sec 8, Evidence Act stipulates that any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes motive or preparation for
any fact in issue or relevant fact.73 Thus, previous victim had upset during the problems with accused
between parties are admitted to show motive. It is further pertinent to note that if there is motive in doing an
act, then the adequacy of that motive is not in all cases necessary.74 Heinous offences have been committed
for very slight motive. That I have already mentioned that the witness had clearly confess that the accused
murder victim because of money. Because victim already caught twice while stealing her jewellery.
According to the complaint victim was very upset because of the bad behaviour of the accused. Here
accused wants to silent the victim to hide her role. Here blue mark on the neck of victim its clearly said the
motive of the accused to kill the victim.75
3.3 IT WAS NOT AN ACT OF ACCIDENTAL :-
Sec 15, Evidence Act stipulates that when there is a question whether the act is not an accidental or
intentional in that time act was done by a particular knowledge or intention.76 Here in this case the
accused knows that doctor advised to the victim to stay off to the mushroom. But here the accused
wants to kill the victim that’s why she gave her mushroom in her breakfast. After that victim felt
nauseating then accused came suddenly with a glass of water and some medicine. Here the victim didi
not felt well that’s why the accused went her office to bring some file. Around 5 pm evening accused
went inside the house.77 According to the statement of Guard Accused started shouting for help and
called Mrs Tai. Here also the husband of victim went to newyork for some conference. Here a time gap
of 2 hours.78 In this time the accused take the benefit of it and choked the neck of the victim very
forcefully. According to the autopsy report it is called asphyxia. It was proved that knowledge and
intention both are present in this act.79
73
Section 8 of the evidence act
74
Supra note 6
75
Exibhit 2, autopshy report, p 2
76
Section15 evidence act
77
Case details, p2
78
Exchibit 3, statements under 161, p3
Supra note 20
79

16

ARGUMENTS ADVANCE
PRAYER
Wherefore, in light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, may this Hon‘ble
Court be pleased to:
1. Convict Ms. Cortena for the offence of committing Culpable Homicide with murder under
Sections 299 /302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Declare a sentence of imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and also be
liable to fine under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
AND/OR
Pass any other order it may deem fit, in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience.
All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted
Place: Aminabad S/d
Date: May 29, 2013 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

3RD Kiit Intra Mock Trial Competition PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3RD Kiit Intra Mock Trial Competition PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3RD Kiit Intra Mock Trial Competition PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

I

TEAM CODE- 308

3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSIONS

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SESSIONS JUDGE

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION

Table of content …………. ………………………………………..…… …… II

List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………… III

Index of Authorities ……………………………………………… ………… IV

Table of Cases ………………………………………………………………. V

Statement of Jurisdiction …………………………………………………… VII

Statement of Facts …………………………………………………………. VIII

Statement of charges ……………………………………………………… IX

Summary Of Arguments …………………………………………………… X

Arguments Advanced ……………………………………………………… 1

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

AIR All Indian Report

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

10. hamsul Huda , ‘ The Principals Of Law Of Crimes’

1. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1973)

2. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 18 of 1872)

3. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860)

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

‘177. Ordinary place of inquiry and trial-

Read with Section 209:

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE ?

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF CULPABLE HOMICIDE ?

 There must be a death of a human being.[1.1]

1. With the intention of causing death.[1.3(1)]

1.1 CAUSING DEATH OF HUMAN BEING :

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

1.2 BY DOING AN ACT :-

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

1.3 INTENTION OF CAUSING DEATH :

3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

2.2 Intention of the offender:-

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

2.3 Attempt of the offender:-

2.4 preparation of the offender :-

2.5 Guilty mind of the offender

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION

3RD KIIT INTRA MOCK TRIAL COMPETITION, 2019

WHETHER CORTENA IS GUILTY OF MURDER ?

3.1 ACTUS REUS OF MURDER IS PROVEN :-

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUION