CONSTITUTIONAL MOOT PROBLEMS 2021-2022

A1

ABC Vs. State of Pride ABC, a company engaged in designation online games have created a
game entitled ‘red Ox’ which is to be played on mobile phones. The game being challenging in
nature, caught immediate attention of the users especially children and youngsters. It became a
big hit and popular among the people throughout the world including ‘Indica’. The mode of
playing the game is-the user has to download the game from app store. He is required to agree to
the terms and conditions of the game. One of such terms and conditions of the game is that the
user has to be above the age of 18 years to register and play the game. Once agreed to the terms
and conditions, he is required to register for the game by providing his personal details. Once
registered, he is provided with one administrator whose shall then observe the given tasks
performed by the player. The game consists of 50 levels. On each level, the difficulty level
increases. In the beginning, some simple tasks are assigned to be performed by the player which
shall be verified by the administrator. In order to verify such performance, the player has to leave
some mark and upload the video of the same. As the game becomes more and more challenging,
the player gets addicted to it and as a result the last level of the administrator demands the player
to commit suicide after drawing an image of Red OX on his hand. The game became so popular
among the youth that even it penetrated into the schools wherein few school going children
around the age 10-12 were found committing suicide by embossing a logo of Red Oxon their
hand. The ‘State of Pride’ identifying it as a threat to the life of children and abusive of life have
issued notice to the company ABC for withdrawing its game from online portal to which the
company responded that they will not withdraw the game as such it do fall within the six golden
freedom as guaranteed by the constitution. The company replied to the notice that the object of
the game is to make the user more firm and competent at their decision. The reply consists of a
statement that ‘there is no abatement to suicide as such as the given was supposed to be
individual competence and observance and one must understand whether to commit suicide on
once provocation or not’. Moreover the reply consisted on allegations on the state that so many
persons have committed for various reasons either by hanging to a tree or fan or poisoning even
many of the times brides are burnt by gas explosion. The reply further alleges that the
government did nothing to prevent these activities by adopting a mechanism and thus this notice
is violative of their fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution if Indica under Art. 14,
19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) read with Art 21. The state of Pride after due deliberation have registered a
crime under Sec. 306 and Sec. 120B of IPC against the company for abatement of suicide by
conspirating with the administrators, imposed a ban on the game throughout the country U/S 69-
A of information Technology Act-2000. Aggrieved by this decision, the company have moved a
petition under Art. 32 of the constitution claiming violation of their rights under Art. 14, 19(1)(a)
and 19(1)(g) read with Art. 21 and for quashing the FIR contending that before this event there
were few more games like – ‘CokemanGo’, of the similar nature which were banned by the
government. But no criminal case was registered against them. Petitioner also contended that, the
state has not given them an opportunity of hearing while imposing ban on their application.
Thus, it violated fundamental rights of the petitioner.

The matter is admitted by the Supreme Court and is now kept for final hearing upon the
following issues:

1) Whether the petitioner has committed any offence under sec. 306 and 120B of IPC?

2) Whether the state of Pride has violated the rights of petitioner enshrined under Art. 14, 19(1)
(a) and 19(1)(g) read with Art. 21?

3) Whether imposing ban on the application “RedOx” u/s 69A of Information Technology Act is
constitutionally vaid?

Note: Arguments should be strictly limited up to the issues framed. The Laws of Indica are
pari materia to the Law of India.

Prepare arguments for both sides.

B2

Citizens v/s The State of Indies The State of Indies is the second most populous country in the
world and has democratic system of governance with a structure which is federal in nature and
with a unitary bias. The State of Indies is also the largest democracy in the world and boasts of
having a population which is diverse in terms of its language, religion, caste and culture and
practices. The State of Indies is popular for its unity in diversity. The State of Indies has a written
Constitution which in its third part deals with the most important facet of fundamental rights.
State of Indies is a developing country and has recently made rapid progress and growth in terms
of technology and skill development. The third part contains different provisions which are based
or borrowed from different Constitutions of the world like the American Constitution, the Irish
Constitution and many other constitutions. The third part of the Constitution of the State of
Indies guarantees to every individual fundamental rights amongst which are Articles 14, 19 and
21, and which rights have been popularly quoted as golden triangle. The Supreme Court of India
has in two judgements – in the case of M.P. Sharma and in the case of Kharak Singh held that
right to privacy is not a fundamental right. However, the said question again fell for
consideration before a recent nine judge bench which while over ruling the earlier two
judgements, held that privacy is a fundamental right. In the elections held in 2014 in the State of
Indies, after a long time a singular political party has come into power and now the said party has
introduces the Aadhar Act which makes it mandatory for all the citizens of the country to have
an Aadhar Card and to link the same to their respective bank accounts, phone numbers, income
tax accounts etc. The validity of the said Aadhar Act has been challenged by the citizens on the
ground that it violates the fundamental right to privacy and that the Government wants to control
the details of all individuals. On the other hand, the government has argued that the act does not
breach the right to privacy. In this backdrop, the matter is now listed before the apex Court of
Indies for final arguments. Both parties are free to advance arguments in this behalf. Reference
may be given to various other such similar prevailing laws in various countries, both developed
and developing. Note: 1) The laws and procedure of Indies are Pari Materia with the Laws of
India.

C3

George & Another V/s Somesh & Another Mr. George, resident of the State of Capricorn, who
owned 8 acres of agricultural land under survey no. 77/7, filed a suit bearing R.C.S. no.420/2011
before the Civil Judge Junior division, at State of Capricorn, for Declaration and Injunction
against Mr. Joseph on the ground that he is the sole owner of the agricultural land in dispute. On
receipt of summons, Mr. Joseph appeared before the said Court and engaged a lawyer to conduct
his case. Mr. Joseph not only opposed the suit claim but also filed a counter claim against Mr.
George for Declaration and Injunction in respect of the said property. The suit was decreed in
favour of Mr. George declaring him as the owner of 8 acres of agricultural land and restrained
Mr. Joseph from interfering with peaceful enjoyment of the said agricultural property of Mr.
George. Aggrieved by the judgement and decree in R.C.S. no. 420/2011 Mr. Joseph filed
Regular Appeal before the First Appellate Court, at State of Capricorn. On receipt of Appeal
Notice, Mr. George engaged Adv. Somesh a famous civil lawyer in the State of Capricorn to
represent and argue his case before the Appellate Court Mr. George paid Fifty Thousand rupees
as initial fee to Adv. Somesh. When Appeal was posted for hearing, Advocate representing Mr.
Joseph argued the matter and completed his side. However, Adv. Somesh sought several
adjournments to argue on behalf of Mr. George. He did not turn up to argue even when it was
posted for final argument. The Appellate Court reversed the finding of the trial court and decreed
the counter claim of Mr. Joseph in R.C.S. no. 420/2011. The Appellate Court in its judgement
noted the absence of respondent’s Adv. Somesh during the course of argument and pointed out
that the Court had no assistance from respondent’s Advocate in deciding the matter. The
judgement of the Appellate Court was death knell for Mr. George as land in dispute was life line
for him and his family. Mr. George enquired with his Advocate about his absence during hearing
of the Appeal but did not get a satisfactory answer. However, Adv. Somesh advised Mr. George
to file Second Appeal against the Judgement of the First Appellate Court and referred the name
of Adv. Anthony. Mr. George followed his advice and engaged Adv. Anthony for filing Second
Appeal and paid rupees One Lakh as initial fee. Adv. Anthony took his own time to file Second
Appeal and by the time Second Appeal was filed, the limitation period was over. Thereafter, he
filed Second Appeal along with an Application to condone the delay. The Second Appellate
Court dismissed the Appeal on the ground of limitation period since no sufficient cause was
shown for condoning the delay. Adv. Anthony advised Mr. George to approach the Supreme
Court. Mr. George virtually had no means to continue the litigation before the Supreme Court as
he had lost all the money in litigation. Mr. Joseph spared no time to execute the decree passed in
his favour by the First Appellate Court and took possession over the land in dispute. Having lost
agricultural land, which was life line for him and his family due to inefficiency and negligence of
his Advocates, Adv. Somesh and Adv. Anthony, Mr. George filed case against them before the
National Consumer disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), at State of Capricorn for
deficiency of service and claimed One crore rupees as compensation. Mr. George argued that
there was ‘deficiency of service’ on the part of both the Advocates who failed to pursue his case
before the Appellate Courts in an efficient and professional manner. He also contended that both
the advocates were highly negligent, one of them did not argue his case before the First
Appellate Court and the other advocate failed to file Second Appeal in time before the High
Court and got it dismissed at the threshold, as result of which he had lost his property and means
of livelihood. On notice, both the advocates appeared and argued that, advocates are immune
from any legal action under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 of State of Capricorn, as Mr.
George is not a ‘Consumer’ under the Act and their relationship as client and advocate is a
‘Contract for personal service’. They argued that they are merely his agents and represented him
in the Court and are Officers of the Court and no legal action can be initiated for actions done in
the course of judicial proceeding. Further, it was argued that, it is for the Court to decide the case
on its merit and no advocate can guarantee the result. The NCDRC, however, allowed the claim
of Mr. George holding that there was ‘deficiency of service’ and awarded one rupees as
compensation and directed both the advocate to pay together the award amount within two
months from the date of the order. The said order created havoc among the legal fraternity and
became national news. Within two months of passing of his Order there were two thousand cases
filed against advocates across the country before consumer forums for deficiency of service.
Both the advocates approached the Supreme Court of State of Capricorn against the award of
NCDRC and contended that among other things that the said award is also in violation of Article
19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of State of Capricorn.

The Supreme Court issued stay against the operation, execution of the award. Now the case is set
for hearing before the Supreme Court of State of Capricorn Issues:

1. Whether the Advocates fall within the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986of
State of Capricorn?

2. Whether the award is in violation of the fundamental right to practice any profession, or to
carry on any occupation as contemplated under Article 19 (1) (g) of the State of Capricorn?

Note : the Laws of State of Capricorn is similar as State of India.

D4
Before the Supreme Court of Indigo Society for Cricket Control in Indigo v/s Mr. Dev & Others
Indigo is a federal country with 30 states. It is a developing country striving hard to surmount the
damage it suffered during the colonial rule. Though it has witnessed a robust economic growth;
still the majority of its population are in the state of penury. There are a great number of various
sports that the rural masses have engaged themselves with, as Indigo nation has a civilization of
over 5000 years. However, as a part of colonial legacy that it has inherited, the sport of cricket
has been exceptionally popular in the country, assuming almost a status of a religion and the
players a demigod! Society for Cricket Control in Indigo (SCCI) is established in Indigo to
control the sports of Cricket. It was formed in 1928 and was registered in 1940 under Societies
Registration Act, 1860. It has its head office situated in Erupadi which before States
Reorganisation was under Maha Pradesh State and after State Reorganisation in 1956 it fell into
the Tamil Pradesh State territory. As Trumbay Public Trust Act 1952 was in force in Maha
Pradesh area SCCI was registered as a Public Trust and was filing the change reports and
property reports under the 1952 Act, Turmbay Public Turst Act 1952 was applicable to Tamil
Pradesh also. The Tamil Pradesh Legislature had subsequently passed Tamil Pradesh Societies
Registration Act 1975. Later in 1998 the operation of trumbay Public Trust Act, 1952 in so far as
it applied to the State of Tamil Pradesh was repealed. SCCI is engaged in hosting international
cricket one day matches and test matches. From 2009 it has started domestic cricket 20-20
matches. It selects Indigo cricket team to represent Indigo in International cricket matches. It is a
self-funded organization, generating more than Rs. 10,000 Crore revenue annually from
franchisees, sponsors and advertisements. Because of its lucrative ventures in the sports of
Cricket, the society attracted many business tycoons, politicians and film stars who occupied
dominant positions in the management of SCCI. SCCI has dominant position and controls almost
all the State Level Cricket Associations and it functions like Cricket Federation as well. It has
absolute power to select the players for Indigo Cricket team; it fixes the remuneration of players
by classifying them into three categories. Many former Indigo cricketers are part of team
selection committee of SCCI and nepotism is not ruled out in selection. The new format of
cricket in the form of 20-20 over matches was introduced by SCCI and it also started Indigo
Premier League (IPL) a domestic cricket tournament. It has made cricket more famous among
the fans and more lucrative investment for many industrialists, politicians and film stars. IPL
gained huge popularity in 2009 and brought lot of revenue to SCCI and owners of different
teams earned huge income from advertisements and sale of tickets. IPL became an absolute
entertainer than just being a sporting event. It was a feast for the spectators and lucrative
business for Film Actors, Politicians and Businessmen. Unfortunately, corruption made inroads
into the great entertaining sport in the form of Match Fixing. It turned out to be a biggest scam of
the millennium with involvement of team owners, players and middle men. In the raids that the
state police conducted and in view of several interceptions conducted, the said scam came into
light. Few middlemen and even players and owners were apprehended and prosecuted. The
players who were involved in Match fixing were banned for lifetime. Meanwhile dispute arose
over election to the Board of Directors (BOD) of SCCI. Mr. Nivasan who was chairman of BOD
of SCCI was alleged to have abetted the match fixing through his Son in Law Mr. Lalit, who was
owner of one of the teams which took part in IPL. However by wielding money power, he
continued to be the chairman, silencing al his opponents in the BOD. Aghast by the enormity of
corruption and its impact on the quality of the game of Cricket, a former Cricketer of Indigo, Mr.
Dev filed a PIL in the High Court of Maha Pradesh alleging that the top management of SCCI
had involved in corruption in elections to BOD, match fixing and betting. Further due to
nepotism of members of BOD of SCCI, quality of Cricket in Indigo is affected and real talents
are being sidelined and sons, grandsons of members of BOD are being selected for Indigo
Cricket team. Briefly in the above facts and grounds, he sought for appropriate directions to
revive the credibility of the sports. SCCI appeared before Hon’ble High Court and filed its
counter affidavit. Denying the contentions and claims of the petitioner Mr. Dev, it was contended
that corruption, if any is an offence and any individual member alleged to have committed such
an offence are being prosecuted as per criminal law of the land and the writ petition is not
maintainable. Without admitting the allegations, it was further contended that even if there is any
mismanagement in SCCI, only the members who have a grievance could approach a civil court
to vindicate their rights if any, under the Bye Laws of the SCCI. Upon repeal to Trumbay Public
Trust Act, 1952 in Tamil Pradesh State SCCI has become an autonomous body and therefore no
writ petition was maintainable in the absence of any statute governing its working. Also it cannot
be said to be performing or not performing a statutory function so as to invoke the writ
jurisdiction. Alternatively it contended without admitting that the appropriate authority to take
action is the Registrar of Societies and hence a writ petition on form of a public interest litigation
is not maintainable. After considering the rival contentions, the Hon’ble High Court passed
orders constituting a Commission headed by Former judge of the High Court, Mr. Yodha to look
into the affairs of the SCCI, corruption charges, amtch fixing issues and also to study the bye-
laws of SCCI and suggest reforms to bring out proper functioning of SCCI. Yodha committee
was given six months time to submit its report but Committee took 10 months time and
submitted its report with number of suggestions which if given effect is tantamount to total
revamping of management of SCCI and its affairs. The copy of the report was furnished to SCCI
to make its say. After appreciating the report, SCCI agreed to accept some of the suggestions
which did not make any major changes in its management. However, it vehemently objected to
major portion of the report and contended that it is not possible to accept all suggestions as it
affects its autonomy and fundamental right guaranteed under Constitution of Indigo. However,
the Hon’ble High Court did not accept the contentions of SCCI. It issued interim directions to
SCCI to conduct elections to its BOD as per the recommendations of Yodha Commission, within
two months. SCCI did not comply with the interim direction citing impossibility of performance.
The High court was pleased to freeze the accounts of the society and also order for appointment
of an administrator.

E5
In the village of Mylapore in Tamil Nadu there is an eminent businessman turned politician
Rahul Raghuvanshi. He has been elected to Tamil Nadu assembly successfully 3 consecutive
times. Rahul a management graduate from Annamalai University was an active student in Youth
Politics. He was The President of Janata Morcha Youth wing and thereafter he joined Janata
Morcha, he held several posts within the party and at a young age of 31 became MLA. Rahul is a
2nd generation politician and son of renowned industrialist Bhargav Raghuvanshi, Shri Raghav
Raghuvanshi has been a 2 times MLA and 3 times MP from Mylapore constituency, he also held
the portfolio of Minister for Urban Development when Janata Morcha was in power in
1987.Rahul Raghuvanshi being an Industrialist owned several factories which had huge
manpower and Trade unions with political affiliation. Rahul after procuring a degree
inmanagement from Annamalai University chose to pursue his family business, in the course of
his business he had to grapple with many problems relating to workforce such as absenteeism,
low productivity, and acrimonious disputes as the trade unions had differences within
themselves. A strike broke out in Mr. Raghuvanshi’s factory on account of denial of bonus and
incentives. There was labour unrest, sloganeering and chaos. The Trade Union Leader Babu
Shankar was affiliated to Samaj Saghatan the party which was in the opposition and arch rival of
Janata Morcha the Party in power.
Rahul Raghuvanshi was in a fix and catch 22 situation as the labourers besieged the bunglow of
Rahul Raghuvanshi at the behest of Babu Shankar on account of political rivalry there was wide
media coverage of the issue. On the 2nd February, 2012 situation was extremely turbulent hence
the local police imposed Section 144 of Cr.PC and also detained a few labourers U/S 151 of
Cr.PC. The detention of many labourers exceeded the prescribed time ordained by Cr.PC. As
Rahul Raghuvanshi used his clout and influence to suppress the agitation, the family member of
a worker filed a Habeas Corpus petition on 6th February, 2012 Under Article 226 and 227 of
Chennai High Court challenging the detention of several workers and also claimed
compensation. The Chennai 2 Bench consisting of Chief justice allowed the petition and gave
relief to the prayers of the petitioners and also awarded compensation. The Trade Union leader
Babu Shankar urged the leader of opposition in Tamil Nadu assembly to broach a debate on
Rahul Raghuvanshi’s undue influence and causing loss to poor labourers. This led to furor in the
Assembly demanding resignation of Rahul Raghuvanshi was the post of standing committee for
Education and Environment. Rahul Raghuvanshi did not relent. This lead to social unrest and
there were protest marches across the city, agitation which led to Gheraos and Bandhs. The
Home minister tried to control the situation with Rapid Action Force and Local constabulary. In
the course of this chaos Rahul Raghuvanshi made a public speech at Tradulai Swamy stadium on
14th May 2012 in the course of his speech he called the agitators of Samaj Sanghtans as ‘wild
creatures’ and urged the Janata Morcha workers to give a ‘fitting reply’ to the protesters. This
caused a furor and there was law and order problem which resulted in casualties and damage to
property. Rahul Raghuvanshi was held responsible for whatever transpired and he was
compelled to resign from the committees he was part of and the portfolio he held. There was
round the clock coverage of the incidents of violence by the media. The opposition demanded an
inquiry of the incidents and insisted on setting up a commission. A Commission was constituted
in August, 2012 by the Ruling Party i.e Janata Morcha under the auspices of retired judge,
Justice Vishwanath to enquire and investigate into this matter. The commission submitted its
report before the House on 17th August, 2013 of the incidents of February, 2012.There was
elections hence the commission report was debated fiercely then kept in abeyance. Samaj
Sanghatan captured Power and Muthuswamy Nair became the Chief Minister in 21 December
2013 and the commission report was again debated with disruptions in the House. The speech
delivered by Rahul Raghuvanshi was regarded as a hate speech causing enmity between two
communities hence he was booked under sec 153 A of IPC for which Punishment in 3 years,
after a lot of pandemonium the Commission report was implemented on 31st December, 2013.
The home minister demanded arrest of Rahul Raghuvanshi and Rahul Raghuvanshi was arrested
and produced before magistrate on 11th January 2014. The magistrate took cognizance of the 3
complaint and convicted Rahul Raghu Vanshi for 3 years imprisonment. The order was
challenged in court of sessions/district court, in May, 2015 the order was upheld and eventually
it was challenged in Chennai High Court. The High Court admitted the appeal and overruled
conviction on 16th November, 2015 of Rahul Raghuvanshi and found that lower courts made
gross error in passing such orders. State challenged the High Court order of acquittal in the
Supreme Court of India.
Issues
1) Is he said appeal maintainable in the Supreme Court?
2) Is the High court justified in setting aside the session court’s order?
3) Does the case have anything pertaining to limitation act or has time barred
as per the relevant legal provisions?
4) Is sanction required for prosecution of Rahul Raghuvanshi as he is member
of state assembly?
5) Is the government bound by the findings of Justice Viswanathan commission
as regards its implementation or not?
4
F6
Bangistan is a small developing country where the freedom of speech and expression is
guaranteed as a fundamental right under the Constitution of Bangistan. However, in last few
months there have been various instances where freedom of speech and expression has come
under the scanner. Kamal Party is the oldest party of Bangistan having its roots prior to the
independence of the country. Pappu Toaster is the Vice President of Kamal Party. In 2014,
during assembly election in the country Kamal Party arranged a huge rally in the capital city of
Bangistan. The Hath Party, born out of a fundamentalist religious organization by the Bangistan
People’s Movement (‘BPM’), was the primary opposition party. Pappu Toaster in the rally,
during his speech accused BPM of harbouring criminals and also alleged that Lattu Korgade,
who had killed the Ex-Prime Minister of Bangistan from Kamal Party, was a member of BPM.
One Radhabhai Jyotshi a member of BPM being aggrieved by the statement of Pappu Toaster
filed defamation complaint against him under Sections 499 and 500 of the Bangistan Penal Code
(‘BPC’). On the receipt of the complaint, summons was issued against Pappu Toaster. Pappu
Toaster, being aggrieved by these summons challenged the constitutionality of Sections 499 and
500 of the BPC stating it to be violative of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of Bangistan
before the Supreme Court of Bangistan.
A member of opposition party in Capital City Willy of Bangistan, Mr. Rudy, accused the
Counsellor of the Capital City Willy, Mr. Goldman, for being corrupt and incapable to run the
government. This generated a huge controversy in the state and Mr. Goldman filed a complaint
of defamation against Mr. Rudy with the concerned police station.
Similarly, Mr. Goldman has also filed more than 200 cases against different individuals and
newspaper organizations for defamation under Section 499 and 500 of BPC. Mr. Goldman has
not filed even a single case for damages under civil defamation law. Mr. Rudy on the ground that
the purpose of filing criminal complaint by Mr. Goldman was to ensure that the editor, publisher
and reporter who speak against the functioning of the government 5 are harassed and summoned
to the court, has consequently challenged the validity of Sections 499 and 500 of BPC and
prayed for decriminalisation of defamation, which is still pending before the Supreme Court of
Bangistan. Mr. Goldman has filed several criminal complaints against various media persons and
therefore he was a target of the various news agencies and there have been repeated news articles
against him. He and his government was criticized and challenged for various steps taken and
policies implemented in newspapers and it was noticed that more than 10% of the news contents
were dedicated in one week only criticizing the government policies of Goldman. Therefore, a
circular was issued by city’s information and publicity department saying that if any officer
associated with the Willy Government feels that the published or aired item has caused damage
to his or the governments’ reputation, he would be free to file a complaint with the Principal
Secretary (Home). The circular also states that after getting a go ahead from the director
(prosecution), the matter should be referred to law department and after taking approval from the
government, a case would be registered. Bakbak Oswami from Times Today media house
challenged the said Circular of the government of Willy of being violative of Article 19(1))a) of
the Constitution. The State of Bangistan had witnessed a bloodiest terror attack in 1993 whereby
more than 350 people were killed and around 900 were injured. The prime accused of the said
terror attack Mr. Bhudbak Len had surrendered to the police of Bangistan taking full
responsibility of the terror attack. Mr. Bhudbak Len was tried by the Sessions Court along with
89 other accused. In the said trial after examing more than 600 witnesses and giving reasonable
opportunities to all the accused the Sessions Court convicted Bhudbak Len on the charge of mass
murders and waging war against the nation. The Sessions Court punished him with a death
sentence. The punishment was confirmed by the Supreme Court. Mr. Bhudbak Len then filed a
Curative Petition against the said order which was dismissed and the death penalty was
confirmed. Mr. Bhudbak then appealed to the President of Bangistan for mercy and the said
petition came to be rejected and the death penalty to Mr. Bhudbak Len telecasted news articles in
a manner to create sympathy towards Mr. Len and criticizing the government and the Supreme
Court in its decision to hang Bhudbak Len to death.6 The news channels and some intellects
criticised the decision of death penalty on the ground that he has himself surrendered to the
Bangistan Police and the death penalty was not justified. The Information & Broadcasting
Ministry took serious note of the reporting on the issue of death penalty to Bhudbak and issued
notices to media channel suggesting it to report such matter with caution. The notice also
accused the channels of casting aspersions on the integrity of the President and the judiciary,
inciting violence and anti-national sentiments. Government of Bangistan also issued a circular
prohibiting the media channels from telecasting and reporting anything on the hanging of
Bhudbak Len which can harm the communal harmony and integrity of the country and which
condemned the Judiciary and the office of President of the Country. The circular stated to be
issued as imposing a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) of the Constitution as it endangers
the public order and security of state. The Bangistan Broadcasting Association challenged this
circular as being violative of right to freedom of speech and expression. As all the above issues
concerns interpretation of Article 19(1)(a) and (19)(2) of Bangistan Constitution it was placed
before a Special Bench of the Supreme Court of Bangistan to decide issues:-

1. Whether Sections 499 and 500 of BPC infringes the fundamental right of
freedom of speech and expression enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution?
2. Whether the circular issued by the government of City Council Willy is
violative of fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression enshrined
under Article 19(1)(a) if the Constitution?
3. Whether the press enjoys unfettered right to freedom of speech and
expression?
4.Whether the circular issued by the government of Bangistan prohibiting the
telecast and reporting of hanging of Mr. Bhudbak Len is unconstitutional and
against the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression enshrined
under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution?
Note: (i) The laws of Bangistan are in parity with Indian Laws 7

G7
Drishti Foundation vs. Union of Indiva
Shivrashtra is a state in the Union of Indiva. The population of the state on the basis of religious
faith comprises 40% Hindus, 25% Muslims, 15% Christians and the remaining 20% belong to
various smaller groups like Parsis, Tribal and Non-tribals and Non-believers. The state is
predominately a hilly area with four holy rivers flowing through it and the people are very
religious by nature. A large number of population being illiterate, carries out primitive
occupations. Religious practices, superstitions and rituals, take much of their time and money
which has greatly affected the development of the State.
The state is known all over the world for its religious centers. The various religious institutions
in the state are imparting only religious education putting the secular education into oblivion
which has reduced drastically the people’s employment avenues. As the state is a pilgrimage
center, the religious leaders,
Gurus and Prophets of various religions in the state are vying with one another because of huge
donations offered by the pilgrims. Accordingly, mass prayers, retreats, yagnas, penance services
etc. are conducted very frequently. The religious leaders, so called God men in order to continue
their hold, have created a kind of fear in the mind of their followers by way of fundamentalist
practices and attitudes, which further created divisions in the society and often within the
families too.
The youths of the State, who were boiling with anger and frustration looking at the economic
progress of other states, often revolted against those oppressive and suppressive religious
practices that prevailed in their states. There were many protests by many groups headed by
moderates, intellectuals and nonbelievers on various occasions in different parts of the State.
Dr. Virendra Panhalkar, the 70 years old social activist, who was shot dead on 20th August, 2013
in one city of the State of Shivrashtra, had waged a long and lonely battle for an Anti-
Supersitition Law. Within a week after the vicious assassination of Dr. Panhalkar, the Governor
of Shivrashtra signed the ‘Black Magic Prohibition’ Ordinance. It came in to force from 26th
August, 2013 all over the State of Shivrashtra.
The ordinance is aimed at banning superstitious practices, inhuman rituals and black magic that
have been the used to exploit people in the name of religious beliefs.
This law is against fraudulent and exploitative practices, such practices have no place in an
enlightened society. In the entire text there is not a single word about God or Religion.
The essential purpose of this law is to bring social awakening and awareness in the society and to
create a healthy and safe social environment with a view to protect the common people in the
society against the evil and sinister practices thriving on ignorance. The draft Bill clearly
specifies 12 such practices.
These includes, claiming to perform surgery with just fingers or to change the sex of the foetus in
the womb, sexual exploitation under the guise of claims of supernatural powers, branding
women as witches and causing them physical harm, human sacrifices and other Aghori practices.
Inspite of coming into force of the above legislation the superstitious activities are no rise. The
people of State of Shivrashtra are being exploited by the selfdeclared God like Babaram
Maharaj, who has amassed huge wealth by exploiting the religious sentiments of the people.
Under the garb of religious practices he started to exploit illiterate and poor women & children
and employed youths. He uses their energies by providing them training to play with rifles and
arms for his own protection and to prevent Govt. authorities to take any action against him. He
poses himself as god or Supernatural power to attract women and he sexually abused many
women’s too. The ban his activities the govt. of Shivrashtra tried to enter in to his Ashram but
could not succeed.
In the backdrop of above facts and circumstances, Drishti Foundation which is NGO working
against the exploitation of the religious feelings of the people by such so called Godman
Babaram, has filed a PIL before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of Constitution of Indiva
challenging the activities of exploitation being carried out by the so called Baba’s in their Maths
and Ashrams and has prayed therein that all these Maths and Ashrams which arecarrying out the
activities of exploiting the religious feeling of the people should be closed and all the assets
acquired by these Baba’s be confiscated and added to the national wealth of Indiva. Looking in
to the facts and circumstances the Hon’ble Supreme court of Indiva, has placed the present PIL
for final disposal at the stage of admission and has framed following issues:-

Issues:-
1) Whether the PIL is maintainable before the Supreme Court of Indiva for
hearing and admission?
2) Whether the activities exploiting the religious sentiments of the people
amount to infringement of Fundamental Rights of the people of Indiva?
3) Whether the alleged activities are contrary to the secular structure of Union
of Indiva as enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of Indiva?
4) Whether the ban on such Maths / Ashrams would violate the fundamental
rights of the people to follow the religious faith of their choice?
5) Whether instead of closing down such Math’s / Ashrams, keeping these
Math’s / Ashrams under the Government supervision would be available
alternative?
10
6) Whether amendment in the present laws is necessary to deal sternly with
such Baba’s?
Note: - The laws and Constitution of Indiva is the same as to the laws and
Constitution of India.

H8
Maratha Butchers’ Association, a Registered Society and Others …... Petitioner
v.
State of Maratha and Others …... Respondent
 The Republic of Indica is located in the South Asian Region of Asia. It is one of the ancient
nations in the world. Till 1947, Republic of Indica was a British colony for about 150 years. It
achieved independence in 1947. Now the Republic of Indicais a democratic country with a
written Constitution which came into force in 1950. Ithas 29 States and 7 Union Territories. The
Constitution has adopted Parliamentary system wherein President is the executive Head of the
government. The majority of the population of the country belongs to Hindu religion.
Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Jainism and Sikhism are the other major religions followed by the
people of Republic of Indica. The Republic of Indica is characterized by a diversity of religious
beliefs and practices, dressing, cultural outlook, food-habits etc. Some religion like Jainism
strictly follow the principle of non-violence and therefore stressed upon vegetarian food habit.
This is not so in case of other religions. Under Hindu religion some are vegetarians and some are
non-vegetarians. Throughout the Republic of Indica’s history, religion has been an important part
of the country’s culture. The history of Republic of Indica has witnessed some prominent
instances of religious disharmony amongst various religious groups.
The Constitution of Republic of Indicadeclaresvarious rights as fundamental rights. Some of
the fundamental rights are the right to freedom of religion, freedom to carry on any trade,
profession and business, right to life and personal liberty etc. The fundamental rights are mostly
enforceable against the ‘State’. The concept of ‘State’is defined by the Constitution ofRepublic
of Indica. The Constitution also incorporates some features of secularism.The Supreme Court of
Republic of Indica, in its few landmark judgments has expanded the meaning of ‘right to life and
personal liberty’. Almost everything which has connection with person’s meaningful life has
been held as integral part of this right. Recently the Supreme Court of Republic of Indica held
that right to privacy is a part of‘right to life and personal liberty’.
The Constitution on Indica also laid down some Directive Principles of State Policy. These
directives are not enforceable in the court of law, nevertheless these principles are to be looked
into while formulating any policy and enacting any law. One of those directives laid down that
the “State shall endeavor to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and
scientific line and shall take steps in particular for preserving and improving the breeds,
and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.” This
directive was inserted in the Constitution of Indica after a long-heated debate. On the one hand
the economy of the Republic of Indica is largely based upon agriculture and on the other hand
cow is treated as ‘Holy’ under Hindu religion. Therefore, the above-mentioned directive was
perceived to be an outcome of a compromise between the scientific rationality and religious
sentiments of the majority Hindu citizens.
The Constitution on Indica also laid down some fundamental duties for its citizens. One of
the fundamental duty of the citizens is to protect and improve the natural environment and to
have compassion for living creatures.
Since 1950 Republic of Indica and various States enacted laws for the protection of Cows.
Some of these laws are enacted with specific object of protection of cow whereas some of them
were enacted in the name of ‘protection of animals from cruelty’.
State ofMaratha is situated in western regionofRepublic of Indica and second most populous
state of the Republic of Indica.In 1978 it enacted the Maratha Animal Preservation Act, 1978. In
1995, amendments were made in 1978 Act and Amendment Act of 1995 was reserved for the
assent of the President. (Under the Constitution of the Republic of Indica, if on a subject-matter
both the Republic as well as state legislature enacted a law, then the state law will prevail over
the Republic Law only if it has been reserved for the President’s assent and received such
assent). These amendments sought to make following changes in the Act of 1978-
1. It sought to extend the bans on the slaughter of cows and calves to bulls and bullocks.
2. It sought to prohibit the transport (from the State of Maratha to another state), the export,
as well as purchase, sale and disposal of cows, bulls and bullocks for the purpose of
slaughter.
3. It sought to prohibit the possession of the flesh of the cow, bull or bullock slaughtered in
contravention of the provisions of the Act.
4. It also criminalizes the possession of beef per se, whether or not this was obtained
through lawful slaughter from another state.
5. The amendment sought to put the burden on the accused that he/she was not in
contravention of provisions of the Act.
6. The amendment also stipulated punishment for the contravention of the Act.
The Amendment Act, 1995 received the assent of the President in 2015 and came into
force immediately. Meanwhile there was a political turmoil throughout the Republic of
Indica. Various religious organizations started large scale mobilization against slaughter of
 cows. Few individuals were attacked on the accusation that they stored cow-flesh in their
home. It createdthetension between those who were beef-eater and those who were not.More
particularly, a minority community ‘X’ was affected drastically as beef eating was their
common food habit. Moreover, beef was less costly as compared to other non-vegetarian
food. As the degree of poverty is higher in community ‘X’, beef eating was an easy source
of protein for them. But with the new amended law by the state of Maratha, they were
deprived of this source.
In this background, writ petitions were filled by various associations and individuals
before the Hon’ble High Court of State of Maratha challenging the constitutional validity of
the Amendment Act of 1995.Maratha Butchers’ Association, a Registered Society is one of
the petitionerworking for the protection of the interest of minority community‘X’.
This petition is posted for final arguments and for disposal on 20th January, 2018.
shall refer to the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1978 along with the amendments made
to it from time to time.

I9
Republic of Indiva is a country which has various cultural and historical glories to its name and
was often nicknamed as the “Land of Culture”. People from various backgrounds lived in
harmony and abided by the laws of the land. In Republic of Indiva, the majority of the
population worshipped deities in the personification of women as a symbol of Strength and
Fearlessness. Ankara is a State of Republic of Indiva with the highest literacy rate among all
other States of Republic of Indiva and the people believed in the Equality between Men and
Women in all spheres of life.

Shrishti was a young Advocate who had just passed her college and started practicing. She was
very ambitious about her work and always worked for the poor and needy people free of cost.
She was always the last one to leave her workplace and often took her personal vehicle to travel
home from workplace. One such night, on 17-01-2020 around 9:30 P.M. she was returning from
workplace on her scooty, where she noticed four men desperately asking for help beside the
highway. Out of generosity, she stopped her scooty and two men told her that they are tourists
and one of their friends is laying injured at a distance. While she got down from her scooty, two
of them accompanied her to a distant secluded place.
On her way, she realized that her phone was inside the scooty, so she returned for taking the
same and on return, she found that her two-wheeler tyre was punctured. Shrishti called her
younger sister Nancy at 9.35 p.m. to inform that her scooter had broken down and she was alone
on the road. All of a sudden, the two men, who had asked for help accompanied by two other
men came towards her and started touching her in a wrong way. She got scared and slapped one
of them, to which the men became angry and then dragged the girl to a distant place and raped
her one by one. In the fear of not getting caught, the four men put petroleum in her body and
burnt her alive till she was dead and ran away towards the nearby village.

On 18-01-2020 the partially burnt body was found at an underpass on the Ankara-Bendakal
national highway by a farmer around 6 a.m. He informed the village sarpanch, who alerted the
local police. After confirming that the victim was a female, the local police verified the recent
women missing cases and then, with the help of the handbag and the scarf, the family members
were able to recognise her.

The Police started various investigation procedures and discovered a CCTV footage which was
placed near the highway for traffic control. By looking at the CCTV footage, the Police saw
some faces where the recording timing showed around 10:00 P.M. based on which, they started
searching for the four men who had run towards the village and started the enquiry. On 23-01-
2020, based on its investigation, the Police arrested, Javed, Rajesh, Naveen and Keshav. In the
meantime, as soon as the news became viral, people all over the country started protesting and
the news became trending all over Social Media and people demanded Justice for Shrishti.
People from various political background as well as Film Industry and Media houses demanded
speedy Justice and #KillTheRapists became viral all over the Country and the Government took
initiative for a speedy disposal of the case.

On 24-01-2020, the Police presented the four accused in front of the local Magistrate and
requested for a 7 days remand for further investigation. Amidst the remand period, the entire
Country protested with candle light marches and various High-Profile Personalities also got
involved in the protests. On 03-02-2020, the Media flashed the news that the four accused had
been shot dead by the Police while they were being taken to the Court. The Investigation In-
Charge in the Interview stated that Naveen and Keshav snatched the revolvers from the
Constables while they were being taken to the Court, jumped out of the Police Van and fired two
rounds in the air. Javed and Rajesh also followed them and tried to escape. The Police claimed
that they found no other ways and had to shoot down the four accused otherwise the accused
would have fled.

The killing of the accused in the alleged encounter was hailed by a section of people,
the families of the deceased and human rights groups alleged that the police took law
into its hands, terming this as extra-judicial killing. In the police press conference that
followed, questions as to how two of the four accused managed to get hold of the pistols
in the presence of 10 armed police officers went unasked.

The families of the Four Accused also alleged that the police officers have have framed the
murder scene as they had threatened them when they went to the police station. The families
informed the reporters that the police officers angrily made the statement to the families that the
accused stand no chance of being saved from death as the entire Nation was against their act.

As soon as the News became viral, the entire Country rejoiced and supported the action of the
Police and the same was called an “Act of Bravery” by various Political Leaders. But, An NGO
named as “Saman Adhikar” filed a Petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Ankara. The
Hon’ble High Court of Ankara after hearing all the arguments of the case held “The Police had
no other option but to shoot the four accused failing to which they would have fled and which
would have triggered mass and widespread agitation throughout the Nation and the Role of the
Police would have been in question. Therefore, the Court finds the Act of the Police as an Act of
Bravery and sudden reflex to counter the situation which arose in front of them.”

Families of the four accused who were gunned down by the police in an alleged
encounter, have approached the Supreme Court, seeking registration of murder case
against the police officers involved. Alleging that the youth were killed in a stage-
managed gunfight, the families filed a writ petition under the provisions of Article 32 of
the Constitution that enables individuals to seek redressal for the violation of their
fundamental rights.

The NGO, after the Judgment by the Hon’ble High Court, approached the Hon’ble Supreme
Court on the contention of violation of Human Rights as well as the violation of Fundamental
Rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Republic of Indiva. All the petitions have been
clubbed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Republic of Indiva and stands pending before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court of Republic of Indiva.

J10

ALERT INDIVA Vs. STATE OF BRAMHA AND OTHER The State of BRAHMA is one of
the States in Indiva. Due to wrath of nature the state is facing an acute scarcity of water and the
condition in major part of the state is near to drought. To meet this situation, the state of
BRAMHA has taken a policy decision to construct the number of dams in the State so that the
rainy water could be accumulated in the dams which would help in meeting the growing needs of
water for the purpose of drinking, agriculture and also for the Industries. The Government is also
of the opinion that the accumulation water in the dams would help in recouping the underground
water level in the state. One of such dams is to be constructed in a district which is more severely
affected. The construction of the dam would affect ten villages which are adjoining to the
location of the dam. The villagers have agriculture as their main occupation and as a
consequence of the water stored in the dam, their agricultural fields would either be submerged
or get water logged which would deprive them of their right to livelihood. The state of BAMHA
for the purpose of the construction of dam had floated global tenders and one of the companies,
Reliable Industries limited has been given a contract to construct a dam. The reliable industries
limited for the purpose of construction of the dam had applied for environment clearance to the
Ministry of Environment and Forest for the purpose. Environment clearance has been given to
the company on the ground that the Government has an authority to do so in larger public
interest. The agriculturist in the village are also not in favour of the construction of the dam since
they would be displaced from the land where the dam is to be constructed and would be deprived
of their livelihood. “Alert Indiva” is NGO which for the protection of environment in Indiva.
“Älert Indiva” which is fighting for the cause of environment has appealed to the Government
not to proceed with the construction of the dam since it would lead to an environmental
imbalance in the State. However the state of BRAMHA is determined to proceed with the
construction of dam in public interest. “Alert Indiva” has therefore filed a petition under Art.226
and Art.227 of the Constitution of Indiva on the ground that the Environment Clearance
Certificate granted is bad in letter and spirit of the constitution and against the national interest.
“Alert Indiva” has also taken the cause of the agriculture who are likely to be displaced and has
submitted that the construction of the said dam is in violation of Art.21 of the constitution of
Indiva as regards right to life and Personal liberty of the agriculturists in the area. The High
Court of Judicature of Bramha has admitted the petition for hearing and has framed the following
issues for the purpose of adjudication. Issue No.01 Whether the present petition has been field in
public interest and therefore maintainable as a Public Interest Litigation? Issue No. 02 Whether
the Writ Petition filed under Art.226 and Art.227 of the Constitution of Indiva is Maintainable?
Issue No. 03 Whether the High Court of BRAMHA can interfere in any policy decision taken by
the State of BRAMHA? Issue No. 04 Whether the displacement of the agriculturists from the
area where the proposed dam is to be constructed amounts to violation of Art. 21 of the
Constitution of Indiva? Issue No. 05 Whether the Environment Clearance Certificate granted by
the State is contrary to the provisions of Constitution of Indiva? Issue No. 06 Whether the
decision taken by the State of BRAHMA to construct the dam deserves to be maintained or
should be quashed and set aside?