Page 1 of 38

LEX EXPLORE 1ST NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETETITION, 2023

TEAM CODE;42

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIVA

(Under Article 136 of the constitution)

MR. CHHOTELAL ; PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIVA ; RESPONDENT

Page 2 of 38

1st LEX EXPLORE MEMORIAL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETION, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPIC

LIST OF ABBREVIATION…………………………………………
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…………………………………………
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………….
SUMMARY OF FACTS……………………………………….
STATEMENT OF ISSUES………………………………………
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…………………………………….
ARUGMENTS ADVANCED………………………………………….
ISSUE 1………………………………………………………………………………
ISSUE2……………………………………………………………………………..
ISSUE 3………………………………………………………………………………..
PRAYER……………………………………………………………………………….

1ST LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ,2023

Page 3 of 38

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SR.NO. FULL FORM

1. &…………………………………….AND
2. AIR…………………………………ALL INDIA RECORD
3. Anr………………………………….ANOTHER
4. Art……………………………………ARTICLE
5. Cr………………………………….CRIMINAL
6. HON’BLE…………………………HONORABLE
7. Ors………………………………....OTHERS
8. SEC………………………………….SECTION
9. V………………………………….VERSUS

1ST LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

BOOKS REFFERED

Prof. S.N MISHRA INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860

Page 4 of 38

DR, J.N PANDY CONSTITUTION LAW OF INIDA

DR. K.V KELKAR CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
BATUKLAL LAW OF EVIDENCE

LIST OF STATUTES

1. INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860

2. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950
3. INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
4. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973
5. DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 2005

LIST OF CASES

1. Paparambaka Rosamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2. Vijay Pal v state of Haryana
3. Krishna Lal v. Jagan Nath
4. State of Punjab v. Praveen kumar
5. Bhairav singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
6. Inder Raj Malik v Sumita Malik
7. Savitri Devi v. Ramesh chand & ors.
Page 5 of 38

8. Anju v State of NCT Delhi

9. Sushil kumar v. Union of India & ors.
10. Chandra Bhan v state
11. Punita soni v. Brijesh kumar verma
12. State v. Ram Avatar
13. Smt. Maya devi v state of Uttar Pradesh
14. Rajesh sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh
15. Manav adhikaar v Union of India.

1ST LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

STATMENT OF JURISDICTION

Chhotelal has filed a special leave petition under article 136 of the Constitution Of Indiva.

1ST LEX EXPORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETION, 2023.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Mr. Chottelal kumar and kiran kumari marriage was solemnized on 01/01/2020 as per Hindu ceremonies.
Chhotelal kumar used to demand money from his wife from the day of their marriage. For staying only 20
days in her matrimonial home, kiran kumari returned to her parent’s home and told them that her husband is
demanding dowry, luxury cars and other valuable things. Her Father gave rupees 10 lakhs and sent her back
to matrimonial home. He again demanded rupees 50 lakhs for purchasing a plot upon a condition that he will
take kiran kumari to her matrimonial home once he is paid what he is asking for. After few days chhotelal
apologized to his wife with a change in his heart and promised to keep her happy.
Page 6 of 38

On 10th September,2022 Kiran kumari again went to her parent’s home and said that chhotelal is demanding
for another 60 lakhs in consequence of which Kiran kumari’s father gave her 30 lakhs and promised to give
remaining balance soon.

On 15th October 2022, at about 9:00 am kiran kumari died of strangulation due to suicide at her matrimonial
home. Kiran’s father lodged an FIR of Murder against Mr. Chhotelal kumar. The police registered the FIR,
held the inquest over the dead body and sent the same for Post Mortem. After the medical examination of
the body, a ligature mark around her neck and on dissection of the ligature mark ecchy mosis were present,
trachea was congested and was containing bloody froth. The medical examiner opined that the death was
due to strangulation. The chargesheet was filed under section 304B of Indian Penal code 1860,

During investigation police recovered a diary written by kiran , wherein she had narrated how her husband
use to make demand for dowry . chottelal kumar took the plea of alibi and stated that, the moment he
returned from office , he found deceased hanging from the hook of ceiling. He got nervous and thus could
not intimate the police.

Trial court after inquiry held that this is a case of strangulation and therefore the death was unnatural and
that there was demand for dowry and also cruelty on the part of accused, Trial court convicted the accused
under sec. 304B and 498-A Of Indian Penal Code. The learned Trial court , considered the diary and dying
declaration . whereby on appeal to Hon’ble High Court agreed with the decision trial court and dismissed the
appeal.

Chottelal kumar filed the special leave petition to Supreme Court under Art 136 of the Constitution of
indiva.

1ST LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS;

a.)Whether the diary written by kiran kumari can be considered as a piece of dying declaration?

Dying declaration which is defined under section 32(1)¹ of the Indian Evidence Act which says
that ,statement written or verbal of a relevant facts made by a person , it is the statement of a person who
died, disclosing the cause of his death, therefore it is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the
diary recovered by the police officer could not be said to be considered as dying declaration as the diary and
the facts narrated therein by the kiran kumari does not fulfill the essential elements of dying declaration as
defined under section 32(1) of the Indian evidence act 1872, it is merely a narration of happening , it fails to
connect with the circumstances which relate to cause of her death . There is a possibility that she was
tortured or prompted by some other person.
Page 7 of 38

b. whether section 304B and section 498A of Indian penal code ,1860 is unconstitutional?

It is humbly submitted that section 304b² and section 498A³ shall be unconstitutional, as it violates the
principle and reasoning behind art. 14 of the Indian constitution . The nature of section 304B and 498A is
typically biased and inclined towards the feminine party such that it shivers the basic structure of the
constitution which includes the unavoidable fundamental rights as well.

The Constitution is on the verge to face humongous backlash and non acceptance in the society . Our
Constitution has brought us a long way eradicating discrimination based upon a gender and these two
sections alone are challenging gender disparity to such an extent that it can take us even behind from where
we have begun.

The case of ; CHOTTELAL KUMAR V. STATE OF INDIVA can play a pivoting role in safeguarding the
interest of the Constitution and provide equality and justifies the fundamental rights in the best way possible.

c. whether the judgement of learned Trial court and Hon’ble High Court is erroneous?

Yes , the judgement passed by the learned trial court and Hon’ble High court is definitely erroneous and
needs multiple revisions from roots to each and every clause of these sections .The respected courts has
taken extremely conservative approach and primarily focused at only one segment of the case.

In the heat to provide quick justice to the prima facie victim of the case the courts under societal pressure are
forgetting to walk at the midway and provide equal right of representation to the other party without any
biased.1

Cases that are covered under these sections appeared to be extremely heinous which spreads a certain rage
against one party in the whole society , when people are too much supporting the victim party and spreading
the rage against the other party , it is very evident from the decisions of the court that the judgements are
extremely influenced by the public opinion which is generally unprosecuted.

1
Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872
² section 304B of Indian Penal Code, 1860
³ section 498A of Indian Penal code, 1860.
Page 8 of 38

1st LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETIOTION.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED:

1.WHETHER DIARY WRITTEN BY KIRAN KUMAR CAN BE CONSIDERED AS DYING

DECLARATION?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble court that the diary written by the Kiran Kumara which
was discovered from the investigating agencies after her death could not be considered as a piece
of dying declaration.

Dying declaration is nothing but a statement of facts by the person who is dead and such
statement discloses the cause of his death or a circumstance which relates to the cause of his
death.

According to Section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act 1872 any statement whether written or verbal
by the dead person which relates to the cause of his death or as to the circumstances which
resulted in his death made relevant in cases where death of a person comes into question.

It is not necessary that such statement only discloses the cause of the death but also discloses
the transaction which resulted into the death.

The counsel further submits that the Diary written by Kiran Kumari ncludes only narration of the
facts which could not be considered as a material piece ,of dying declaration by the virtue of
section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act 1872.

If the conviction made on the basis of diary written by kiran kumari then such conviction would be
prima facie lead to failure of justice and would cause prejudice to the appellant.

The diary written by Kiran Kumara does not fulfils the essential of section 32(1 );

It is to be submitted that,
For a valid Dying Declaration there are certain prerequisites, to be considered which are as
follows-

1.it should be voluntary;

For any statement to be considered as Dying declaration the major requirement is that, it should
be voluntarily made by the person who is dead. there should be absence of any tutoring from other
person , otherwise it would not pass the test of veracity and could not be made admissible.
Page 9 of 38

The diary which was discovered from the Kiran Kumara cannot be said as voluntarily made as
there are huge possibilities that statement mentioned therein might be prompted by some other
person, as there is lack of any information which discloses that at which date she wrote the
statement in diary also there is no mention of the fact that when she wrote the diary her husband
subjected her to cruelty in demand of the dowry or not.

From the facts the last demand of dowry by the appellant Mr. Chhotelal kumar was made on 5 th
August, 2020¹ and the death of the deceased occurred after 2 years of the aforesaid date. This
information makes it clear that for the period of 2 years she wasn’t subjected to cruelty by her
husband.

The date at which kiran kumari made narration of demand of dowry on the part of the appellant is
also missing, therefore conviction made on the basis of such narrative statements results in to
misled of justice.

2.The dying declaration should be made in fit state of mind;

It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble court that the diary discovered from the Investigating
Agencies written by the deceased Kiran Kumari is not treated as a dying declaration as there is
no information discovered regarding the fitness of the mind of the deceased when she wrote it and
narrated all the happenings there in. There is a huge possibility that she may not be mentally fit
while narrating the fact, the same was observed in the case of ;
Paparambaka Rasamma v.state of Andhra Pradesh ² it is to be considered that the person’s
death note ;or narration who is not in the fit state of mind cannot be considered as dying
declaration as it is the major prerequisite of the dying declaration and its admissibility and in the
instant case the situation does not makes it clear whether she was in a fit state of mind or not.

• Authenticity of the writing of the kiran kumara is not discovered.

It is to be contended before the Hon’ble court that the writing of the deceased kiran kumara does
not cross-checked on the part of the investigating agencies. Mere discovery of the diary does not
makes the appellant guilty of the charged offences. There might be chances that the diary may be
written by some other person apart from the kiran kumara, and in such a case any statement
mentioned there in could not be considered as Dying Declaration by the virtue of sec.32(1) of the
IEA, 1872. Lack of authenticity or genuineness leaves nothing but suspicion and conviction made
there on is to be treated as invalid.
Page 10 of 38

For any dying declaration to be relevant and admissible it should be truthful and not result of the
false narration of the fact otherwise it may be relevant but lose its admissibility as it was treated in
the case of Vijay Pal V. state of Haryana³
2

; the chain between the fact mentioned in the dairy and the real cause of a death is broken.
Relying upon such narration of the fact could result to mislead of Justice. The absence of the date
of the facts create inference that the casual relationship between death narrated is broken.

It is to be submitted that relying upon the diary and considering it is a dying declaration is
erroneous.

Any statement made by the deceased should be free from the influential pressure and should be
made spontaneous as, it was held in the case of Krishna Lal V. Jagan Nath,⁴

It is to be pleaded that the diary may contain number of statements of the facts which discusses
the different version of the circumstances which should comply with the relationship between the
cause of death and the declaration of the fact by the deceased in their record to clarify things so
that truth can be ensured. As it was held in the case of state of Punjab v. Praveen Kumar ,
Where a dying declaration said to be a long including number of events or incidents in narrative
form and includes the information of what happened before the actual resort or actual happening
of the event, such statement are more to prone to give impression of doubt or there being a
genuine ,or reliable.

So it is to be contended that the diary written or narrated by the Kiran Kumar happening of the
event includes various types of statement, it does not resembles to be genuine or being reliable
as it was. said in the case of Bhairav Singh vs State of MP ,if there is no Nexus or connection
between the cause of the death and statement narrated then it may be relevant but could not be
made admissible,

so it is humbly submitted and pleaded before the Hon’ble court that the diary written by Kiran
kumari should not be considered as a dying declaration as it lacks veracity ,truthfulness and fails
to fulfill the essentials mentioned in section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act 1872.

21
Para 2 of the moot proposition
² 13th September, 1999.
³ 27th may, 2020
⁴ 17th April, 1990
Page 11 of 38

1st LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

2.WHETHER SECTION to the 304B AND 498 A SHALL BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble court that both the sections i.e, section 304-B and sec 498-A are
Section 304-B;-Whosoever commits Dowry Death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of which
is not less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life .
Section 498-A;- Whosoever being the husband or relative of the husband of a woman subjects such woman
to cruelty ,shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and also may be
liable to fine.
Is violative of art 14 and 21(2) of the Indian constitution.
Article 14¹-state shall not deny person equality before law or the equal protection pf laws within the
territory of India.
Article 20(2)²;-No individual shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
As given in the case of;-Inder Raj MalliK V.Sumita Malik³- it was contended that this section is ultravires
to art 14 and 20(2) of the constitution .there is Dowry prohibition act which also deals with the similar types
cases; therefore both the statutes together creates double jeopardy.
As the nature of both the sections ie, section 304-B and sec.498A is typically biased towards the feminine
party, such that it shivers the basic structure of the constitution which includes the unavoidable fundamental
right. These two sections were laid down to ensure women’s safety and protection and its been used for the
same but on the same page the powers of these sections are been misused by women’s by creating
frivolously false allegations against their husbands with the goal of getting some money or just paining the
family This section’s abuse is increasing day by day and therefore the ladies usually apprehend their
husbands.
Section 498A was designed and inserted into legal framework by the lawmakers with the idea of protecting
women from cruelty , harassment and other offences but cross investigations are performed to test the
validity of these laws, the number of acquittals relative to convictions was greater. Thus one who brought
498a into action conceiving it as shield against cruelty for the women , i.e The Supreme Court are now
considering it as a legal terrorism. Because misuse of section 498A diminishes its credibility. So this is one
to reasons to call this provision as anti male law .As there are large number of complaints and misuse of this
provision is recorded and recognized by the judiciary.
In the case of Savitri devi V. Ramesh Chandra and ors⁴:- the Hon’ble Court specifically recognized the
abuse of these two sections which accompanied by the manipulation of the law to an extents which got
influenced by the marriage itself and thus the Hon’ble court did not found it anyway helpful to the large no.
of communities. The court directed the authorities along with the lawmakers to review the cases properly
and with the best intelligence that can be provided to the case before passing any order.
Considering the case of chottelal kumar V.State of Indiva; few statements are clearly mentioned which
creates a reasonable doubt that the powers of section 304B and section 498A is misused, such as ;
 At the time when marriage was about to solemnized , there was no any such demand of dowry ,
means if the appellant Mr chottelal kumar is that greedy as it is mentioned in the diary then he
should’ve asked for the money at that point of time only.
 Deceased and her father both of them were healthy , literate as well as posted at the renowned and
reputed post.
Page 12 of 38

 When the daughter for the very first time returned back from there matrimonial home with demand
of 10 lakhs , why didn’t both father and daughter took action but fulfilled the demand .3
 And also when the father had the knowledge that her daughter is been subjected to cruelty by her
husband why did father sent her daughter back to her matrimonial house instead of complaining to
the police , as the father working as the prominent politician of nation. He must know that promoting
any such crimes give birth to the another bigger crime, ignorance of law is no excuse.
IGNORANTIA LEGIS NEMINEM EXCUSAT.
 Another parameter which creates the reasonable doubt is ; that there is no any such proof which
shows that the accused was the only person behind that demand for the third time when the daughter
asked for 60lakhs from her father ,as after the second demand he apologized to his wife and brought
her back home.
 After that there was no any such demand from the accused and both lived together for 2 years.
So , all of these parameters creates a reasonable doubt that the petitioner Mr. chottelal who was charged and
convicted under section 304B and section 498A Of IPC should be convicted or not.
Another case in which the misuse took place was the case of; Anju V. State Of NCT Of Delhi ,in thus case
the wife challenged the order of the lower court, and the court charged the accused under section 498a and
sec 304b of ipc .
When the court was going through the facts of the cases , the court noted the FIR, where the wife have had
put allegations on all the members of the family without assigning any particular role which they have done
to constitute a crime, thus no details were provided from the wife’s part or any fact which corroborates the
mentioned fact in the FIR. Also they did not mentioned the date and time when she was subject to that
torture or cruelty. In the view of aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case , The Bombay High
court upheld the order to revisional court and held that as per the mentioned facts of the cases there no such
facts which justify the framing of section 498A of ipc , therefore the accused was acquitted .
In case of, Sushil kumar V. Union of India and ors. The Supreme court held that the purpose of the
provision is to prevent a threat to dowry as well as dowry death. But petitioner rightly satisfied that many
instances came to light where the complaints are not bonafide and are filled with wrongful and malafide
intention . so in this case of Chandra Bhan V. State the Supreme court lays down certain remedies which
could be performed in order of prevent such exploitation;
 The police while registering such complaints shall be careful.
 No cases shall be registered under section 498A/406 of ipc without the prior authorization of
DCP/Addl.DCP;
 Before the registration of FIR prroper investigation shall be performed by the police and when the
situation occurs as there is no other way of settlement left then only the FIR must be registered.
The object of the law is to use this provision as a shield and not the sword, although it becomes difficult for
the authorities in the matters relating dowry, torture, death and cruelty, because there is no any such formula
invented to identify the real victim. But it also cannot be ignored that the main aim of the law is to reach the
truth and punish the guilty and prevent and protect the innocent's complaints strongly claims that the
enforcement agencies and the courts begin with the presumption that the accused is guilty and he should be
in order to provide justice to the victim.
It should be noted that the investigating agencies and courts are the watchdog.
3
¹ Article 14 Of the Indian Constitution, 1950
² Article 20(2)of the Indian Constitution, 1950
³ 30th January, 1986.
⁴ 19th May, 2003.
Page 13 of 38

The main intention of the courts is to ensure that innocent person shall be prevented and protected from the
groundless and malicious accusations. As in many cases there are no direct evidences available or any
circumstantial evidences which could be used as a corroboration to prove the innocent guilty.
In cases of non -cognizable , bailable offences the accused get chance to say back his dues or to present
evidences to discharge the burden of proof which is been hanged on him, but in the case when the person is
been charged under section 498Aor section 304B which is the cognizable , non-bailable offence the accused
didn’t get the quick opportunity to prove his innocence as principle of law says JUSTICE DELAYED IS
JUSTICE DENIED. As the complaint strongly claims the guilt upon the alleged person.

1st LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

As most of the laws nowadays are made to protect the rights of women and to prevent women’s from any
kind of exploitation due to the increase in crime against women .this is also one of the facts that the
women’s exploitations and crimes related to women such as rape cases ,assault ,cruelty ,acid attack etc are at
their peak which is driving force for the parliament to amend such provisions so that the women of the
nation shall be protected and be safe in there nation,
The women somewhere wrongly interpret the act of the legislature and now they want the rights in the
society to mitigate themselves only and sometimes they neglect the other’s rights.
In the primitive age the women were not that educated to understand their rights and role in the society but
in these days ,the ladies are educated , they should believe in the slogan of equality and relentless demand
but the pattern is getting slowly reversed because of the false accusation and the immoral exercise of section
498A, the innocent ie, the family and the husband has to suffer.
Also there are conditions in which some of the men commit suicide due to the hardship to prove themselves.
In the case of Punita Soni V.Brijesh kr.Verma¹; the Hon’ble court resulted into the acquittal of the accused
as the false allegations were charged against the husband and the family .After investigation it was found
that the wife had the extra -marital affair in consequence of which she added the condition that if anybody
will interfere in her lifestyle ,she would commit suicide or impose false dowry case upon the family and
husband as well. Just to protect her right the ladies neglects the others.
In the case of State V. Ram Avtar²; the Supreme Court found that the deceased commit suicide just in order
to prove false allegations and implications which she made . after further examination the parent’s of the
deceased admitted that her daughter imposed false allegations upon the husband and just to prove that she
gave up her life.
In the case of Smt Maya Devi V. Jagdish prasad³; the Hon’ble court found that the deceased used to falsely
threaten the husband that she would implicate him in case of dowry demand and to kill the children.
In case of Rajesh sharma V. State of U.P ⁴ the Honourable Court issued instructions to prevent the misuse
of Section 498 a IPC which was further amended in the case of Manav Adhikar versus Union of India
social action forum 2018 SSC online SC 1501 such guidelines include,
first a complaint to Section 498A and or and other related offences only be examined by the designated
area investigator where a settlement is reach between the parties they may approach the high court by the
section 482 of the Criminal procedure code,1973 seeking the question of proceedings or any other order is
bail application is submitted to the public prosecutor complaint with at least notice that same can be decided
on the same day where possible. The recovery of the disputed out the items may not by itself be a ground for
denial of the bail if it is otherwise possible to protect the maintenance or other it should not be routine for
Page 14 of 38

person ordinary resident in India to impound passport issue Red Corner notice such rules shall not extent to
actual physical harm or the death now the second case of social action forum of the Manav Adhikar versus
Union of India says the petition had been submitted in compliance with Art.32 of the constitution the4
petition argue that it is not fall that there are number of women who suffer abuse in the hands of the husband
and his family and that delegations that Section 498a is being misuse is not based on such misuse from any
specific date it was for the argument that the social intent behind Section 498a IPC is being lost as a river of
the set provision has been diluted and the offence has been made bailable due to the various qualifications
and limitations of this code Rajesh Sharma versus state of up the court concluded after referring to the
directions that the direction with the regard to Family Welfare committees and their duties is not in a garden
s with any provisions of the code of criminal procedure 1973 the offence of cruelty is an offence that is not
accountable and recognisable but because of the direction that makes it impossible to arrest before that
committees report makes it in effective does as explain for the direction given in the Rajesh Sharma case
have been amended by the court the role of the family as to its composition and duties has been ruled in
admissible for the more the settlement route has been revised to provide that if the settlement demand for the
property of valuable protection as a combine with the violence towards are there for both discretion when it
comes to interpreting the terms that appear in the law and even when it comes to sentences this is not
ultravires clothes it does not place an absolute authority on the courts.

4
¹ 20th December, 2019.
² 7th July, 2011.
³ 18 December, 2020
⁴ 27th July, 2017.
Page 15 of 38

LEX EXPLORE 1st NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023.

3.whether the judgement by the learned trial court and hon’ble High court erroneous?
1.It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Apex code that the judgement by the trial court and high court is
erroneous as the guilt of Chhotelal Kumar does not seem to be proved, the circumstances in which Kiran
Kumari died does not discloses the fact that chhotelal Kumar is guilty as the trial court and the high court
held chhotelal Kumar guilty of the offence of section 304b in section 498A of the IPC, 1860.

In the case of kamesh Panjiyar v State of Bihar¹the court laid down the essential elements of dowry death,
which are as follows:

1 The death of a woman should be caused by burns or bodily injury or otherwise than under a normal
circumstances.

2. Such a death should have occurred within 7 years of her marriage

3. She must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of the
husband.

4. Such cruelty or harassment should be for or in connection with the demand of dowry.

5 . It must be shown that such cruelty or harassment has been suffered by the woman soon before her
death.

For the application of section 304-B all the essential elements mentioned above must be satisfied, merely
fulfillment of few essentials does not draw the liability of the accused.

The court in the case of Rajinder singh v state of Punjab² explained the term ‘soon before her death' it was
observed that time delays might vary in cases, but what is necessary is that the demand for the dowry should
be continuing cause for the death of the married woman.

It is to be contented that such decision seems to be inaccurate and the gap between the demand of dowry by
the chhotelal Kumar and the death of Kiran Kumar is almost 2 years as it was clear from the fact that after
5th August 2020¹ he did not ask any money from Kiran’s father, it was Kiran kumara who went to her
parents home on 10 September 2022, so the benefit of doubt should be given to the appellant as Prosecution
failed to prove the guilt of chhotelal kumar beyond reasonable doubt.

This fact leaves a suspicion in the mind that for the period of 2 years there was no demand of dowry, no
information as to the cruelty by the chhotelal Kumar and anything connected therewith and thereto is
missing. There is no static information whether in actual sense chhotelal Kumar asked money on 10th
September 2022 or whether kiran Kumara herself asked her father for the same.

It is to be submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in the case, the chain of the evidences are broken and
there is no sufficient ground which reflects the guilt of chhotelal Kumar from the facts. The essential
elements of both the offences that is section 304b and 498A are not satisfied the deceased Kiran Kumari
died within 7 years of her marriage and such death was not natural,this mere statement and fact does not
make the appellant guilty.
Page 16 of 38

There must be corroboration of the facts and the circumstances must draw the grounds which make chhotelal
Kumar guilty but in the instant case the circumstance which results in the death of the deceased to cause the
death of Kiran Kamari.

The fact that chhotelal apologized for his demand from father of Kiran Kumari and took her back to her
matrimonial home clearly shows that Kiran Kumar was not subjected to cruelty after the apology made by
chhotelal Kumar it is to be submitted that if there is no cruelty on the parts of the appellant and charges and
conviction of section 304 b could not be made.5

It is to be argued hat the main essential of section 304b is not satisfied which is the death should be occurred
soon before her death which in the instant cause does not fulfilled the judgement by the learned trial code
and honourable High court is erroneous, as in the case of Pawan kumar & ors V. State of Haryana³ absence
and lack of evidence regarding the fact that whether deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in
connection with demand of dowry soon before her death the accused was acquitted.

The judgement by the learned trial court and high court is erroneous per se as it does not establish the guilt
of the accused prima facie . The another point of argument is plea of alibi by the appellant, from the facts of
the instant case it can be inferred that chhotelal kumar was at his office and when he returned to home he
found kiran kumari hanging in the ceiling, this shows that there might be chances that someone else has
planned the death of the deceased and hung her in the ceiling of the room.

From the post mortem report it was clear that death was caused by strangulation but it does not proves that
she has committed suicide, there might be chances that someone else killed her and hung her so as to show
that the death was caused by committing suicide. Without acknowledging the whole circumstances
conviction based on incomplete information cannot be made and if made is erroneous in itself.

It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble court that there was no eye witness when the death of kiran kumari
has caused, inferring the suicide from the circumstances does not seems to be valid, as the death of the
deceased may be caused by some other person who has killed her.

In the case of Neelu Chopra & anr. V. Bharati the court opined that if the circumstances are not clearly
make the accused guilty then it would be abuse of process of law, thus conviction cannot be made merely on
the basis of few facts.

In the case of Manju Ram kalita v. State of Assam⁴ in this case the wife alleged that her marital relationship
was not cordial as her husband used to torture her mentally and physically, the appellant was charged under
sect-498A of IPC, the court observed the meaning of the term “cruelty” and said the meaning differs in each
statutory provisions, the conduct of the man, the seriousness of his acts must be compared with the likeliness
of the woman to commit the suicide. It must be established that the woman has been subjected to cruelty
continuously. Petty quarrels would not come under the purview of “cruelty”.

So in the case of kiran kumari's death which was caused by strangulation does not discloses the facts
whereby she was subjected to cruelty soon before her death. The conduct and actions of the appellant was
not harsh which cause likelihood to commit suicide.
In the case of Preeti gupta &anr. V. State of Jharkhand it was held that the court must be extremely
careful and cautious in dealing with dowry death and cruelty and must take pragmatic realities in to

51
1st February, 2005
² 26th February, 2015
³ 7th May, 1996.
⁴ 29th May, 2009.
Page 17 of 38

consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations are required to be scrutinized with great
care and circumspection.
Page 18 of 38

PRAYER

IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE, ISSUES RAISED, ARGUMENTS
ADVANCED AND SUCH AUTHORITIES CITED, THE COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE
PETITIONER HUMBLY PRAYS BEFORE THE HON’BLE APEX COURT TO ADJUDGE AND
DECLARE THAT:
1 The diary written by kiran kumari could not be considered as a piece of dying declaration.
2. The sections 304-B and 498A are unconstitutional.
3. The judgement held by the learned Trial court and the Hon’ble High court is erroneous and the appellant
is not guilty of the charged offences.

The counsel humbly pleads before the Hon’ble court on behalf of the petitioner to pass any other order or
decree, as it may deem fit, in the interest of justice.

And for this act of kindness the counsel shall duty bound forever prays before the Hon’ble court.

ALL OF WHICH IS HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY-

Counsels on behalf of the petitioner

Page 19 of 38

LEX EXPLORE 1ST NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETETITION, 2023

TEAM CODE;42

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIVA

(Under Article 136 of the constitution)

MR. CHHOTELAL ; PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIVA ; RESPONDENT

Page 20 of 38

TOPIC

LIST OF ABBREVIATION…………………………………………
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…………………………………………
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………….
SUMMARY OF FACTS……………………………………….
STATEMENT OF ISSUES………………………………………
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…………………………………….
ARUGMENTS ADVANCED………………………………………….
ISSUE 1………………………………………………………………………………
ISSUE2……………………………………………………………………………..
ISSUE 3………………………………………………………………………………..
PRAYER……………………………………………………………………………….
Page 21 of 38

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SR.NO. FULL FORM

10. &…………………………………….AND
11. AIR…………………………………ALL INDIA RECORD
12. anr………………………………….ANOTHER
13. Art……………………………………ARTICLE
14. Cr………………………………….CRIMINAL
15. HON’BLE…………………………HONORABLE
16. Ors………………………………....OTHERS
17. SEC………………………………….SECTION
18. V………………………………….VERSUS
Page 22 of 38

BOOKS REFFERED

Prof. S.N MISHRA INDIAN PENAL CODE,1860

DR, J.N PANDY CONSTITUTION LAW OF INIDA
DR. K.V KELKAR CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
BATUKLAL LAW OF EVIDENCE

LIST OF STATUTES

6. INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860

7. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950
8. INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
9. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973
10. DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 2005

LIST OF CASES

1. KOLI CHUNILAL SAVJI &ORS VS STATE OF GUJRAT

2. LAXMAN VS STATE OF MAHARASTRA
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA VS SHARIFF
4. KUSHAL RAO VS STATE OF BOMBAY
5. PURUSHOTTAM CHOPRA VS STATE
6. JAYAMMA VS STATE OF KARNATAKA
7. SHARAD BIRDI CHAND VS STATE OF MAHARASTRA
8. INDER SINGH MALIK AND ORS VS SUMITA MALIK
9. KANS RAJ VS STATE OF HARYANA
10. PAWAN KUMAR AND ORS VS STATE OF HARYANA
11. BHASKAR LAAL SHARMA AND ORS VS MONICA
12. SHER SINGH PARTAPA VS STATE OF HARYANA
Page 23 of 38

13. RAJINDER SINGH VS STSTE OF PUNJAB

14. SUNDAR LAL VS . STATE
15. PISHOENDER SINGH AND ORS VS STATE
16. BINAY KUMAR SINGH VS STATE OF BIHAR

STATMENT OF JURISDICTION

Chottelal has filed a special leave petition under article 1361 of the Constitution Of Indiva.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Mr. Chottelal Kumar and Kiran kumara marriage was solemnized on 01/01/2020 as per Hindu ceremonies.
Chhotelal Kumar used to demand money from his wife from the day of their marriage. For staying only 20
days in her matrimonial home, Kiran Kumari returned to her parent’s home and told them that her husband
is demanding dowry, luxury cars and other valuable things. Her Father gave rupees 10 lakhs and sent her
back to matrimonial home. He again demanded rupees 50 lakhs for purchasing a plot upon a condition that
he will take Kiran Kumari to her matrimonial home once he is paid what he is asking for. After few days
Chhotelal apologized to his wife with a change in his heart and promised to keep her happy.

On 10th September,2022 again went to her parent’s home and said that Chhotelal is demanding for another
60 lakhs in consequence of which Kiran kumari father gave her 30 lakhs and promised to give remaining
balance soon.

On 15th October 2022, at about 9:00 am kiran kumari died of strangulation due to suicide at her matrimonial
home. Kiran’s father lodged an FIR of Murder against Mr. Chhotelal kumar. The police registered the FIR,
held the inquest over the dead body and sent the same for Post Mortem. After the medical examination of
the body, a ligature mark around her neck and on dissection of the ligature mark ecchy mosis were present,
trachea was congested and was containing bloody froth. The medical examiner opined that the death was
due to strangulation. The chargesheet was filed under section 304B of Indian Penal code 1860,
Page 24 of 38

During investigation police recovered a diary written by kiran , wherein she had narrated how her husband
use to make demand for dowry . chottelal kumar took the plea of alibi and stated that, the moment he
returned from office , he found deceased hanging from the hook of ceiling. He got nervous and thus could
not intimate the police.

Trial court after inquiry held that this is a case of strangulation and therefore the death was unnatural and
that there was demand for dowry and also cruelty on the part of accused, Trial court ordered to convicted the
accused under sec. 304B and 498-A Of Indian Penal Code. The learned Trial court , considered the diary
and dying declaration . whereby on appeal to Hon’ble High Court agreed with the decision trial court and
dismissed the appeal.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. WHETHER THE DIARY WRITTEN BY KIRAN KUMARA CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A

PIECE OD DYING DECLARATION?
2. WHETHER SECTION 304B AND SECTION 498A OF IPC ,1860 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
3. WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT OF LEARNED TRIAL COURTBAND HON’BLE HIGHCOURT
IS ERRONEOUS?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1.)WHETHER THE DIARY WRITTEN KUMARA CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A PEICE DYING

DECLARATION?

It is humbly submitted before Hon’ble Court that the dairy written by deceased kiran kumara can be
considered as a piece of dying declaration as it fulfills all the essential elements of section 32(1) 1 of the
Indian evidence act , which says that ; any statement either verbal or written made by a person as to cause
of his death, or circumstances which resulted into his death . so the diary which was recovered by police
officer during investigation contains all the essential elements which is helpful in drawing a nexus between
the circumstances which resulted into the death of deceased, when the diary was reviewed , the
circumstances says that the death wasn’t natural , but the result of consistent torture and cruelty upon her.
Page 25 of 38

Also the maxim ; NEMO MORITURUS PRAESUMTIUR MENIRI , means that the dying person cannot
meet his makers with false in his mouth , and this piece of evidence can be used as sole basis to corroborate
the cause of his death , and in many cases, conviction was also done on the basis of dying declaration.

2. WHETHER SECTION 304B AND SECTION 488A OF IPC ,1860 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the section 304B2 and section498A3 should not be
unconstitutional as they’re neither violates any of the provision of the Indian constitution and neither they
are inclined towards the feminine party . the object behind these two section is to strike at the roots of
dowry menace and nothing else.

When the parliament observed the stringent increase in crime rate against women ,another act was
introduced known as DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT , although both the sections and the act deals with the
similar type cases but the Delhi High Court said that no situation of double jeopardy is created. As in the
dowry prohibition act there is no such element of cruelty which has to be fulfilled for alleging the charges
but in section 304B And section 498A, the cruelty is the most essential element to prove for the conviction
of accused.

101010

The legislature , amended these provisions so that the women can use it as shield to protect themselves from
any exploitation, harassment or cruelty.

3.WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT BY THE LEARNEDB TRIAL COURT AND HON’BLE HIGH
COURT IS ERRONEOUS?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the judgement given by the learned trial court and
hon’ble supreme court is not erroneous , as the diary written by deceased kiran kumara says it all. It could
be used as the sole basis of conviction. And also the facts of the cases clearly shows the guilt of the accused ,
when there was consistent demand of dowry from the husbands , and also being cruel to his wife by
torturing her.

Also the result of the medical examination creates a burden of proof on the accused as the report clearly
depicts that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment .

All the evidences and witness were against the accused and other than taking the plea of alibi he has nothing
else to shift the onus which was upon him. So the judgement by the learned trial court and hon’ble high
court is not erroneous.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Page 26 of 38

1. WHETHER THE DIARY WRITTEN BY KIRAN KUMARA CAN BE USED AS THE PIECE
OF DYING DECLARATION?

It is to be humbly submitted on behalf of the respondent that the diary written by kiran kumara can
be considered as dying declaration. Dying declaration is nothing but the statements made by the
person who is dead and such statements discloses the cause of his death or the circumstances of
the cause of his death.

According to section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 " when it relates to cause of death. —
When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the
circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that
person's death comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made
them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever
may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.

It is to be submitted before the Hon'ble court that the deceased kiran kumara was in a habit of
writing diary, upon which she also narrated the cruelty on the part of her husband for demand of
dowry.

Chhotelal kumar used to ask for money from father of the deceased and the happenings started in
the early stages of their marriage, and which obviously resulted in to mental cruelty of kiran
kumara, that's why she used to pen down all the happenings in her life. In relation to the instant
case in which the accused was convicted on the offences of dowry death and cruelty under sec-
304-B and 498-A of Indian Penal code,1860 respectively and in which the learned trial court and
high court have considered the diary written by kiran kumara as a piece of dying declaration as it
fulfils the essential elements mentioned therein under sec- 32(1).

For the application of section 32(1) the basic elements must be fulfilled which are as follows-

.1- The statement (of relevant facts)must relate to the cause of the death or discloses the
circumstances of transaction which resulted in to cause of his death. It is to be submitted that the
diary written by the deceased discloses the circumstances of transactions that took place in her
life which resulted in to her death. The demand of dowry caused mental cruelty to kiran kumara
which in the series of transactions took place for the several times and which resulted statements
made by her made relevant and should be considered as a piece of Dying declaration by the virtue
of section 32 (1).

2- Such statements should be voluntarily made- It is to be contended that from the source of
information and discovery of the diary by the investigating agencies discloses the fact that the
diary was written by kiran kumara herself whereby she narrated all the happenings and demand of
dowry by the accused Chhotelal kumar. There is no suspicion or doubt on the genuineness of the
voluntary made statement by the kiran kumara.
Page 27 of 38

3- The principle of "Nemo maiturus Presumuntur mentri", 'which means the person dying would
not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth' as kiran kumara was suffering mental cruelty as her
husband used to demand dowry from her and her father which shows that their marriage was in
subsistence and Kiran kumara was facing this all alone, it can be inferred from the facts that she
would not lie while facing all these situations.

4- Statement should be truthful-

For any statement to be considered as dying declaration, it should be truthful and should not be a
result of tutoring or prompting. So in the instant case, the diary which was discovered was written
by Kiran kumara. There is no such information to counter the authenticity or the truthfulness of the
statements mentioned in the diary.

5- It should be made in fit state of mind- for any statement to be considered as Dying declaration a
must requirement is
It should be made in fit state of mind- for any statement to be considered as Dying declaration a
must requirement is the statement made by the person should be made when he is in fit state of
mind. Any statement which is made by the unsound or lunatic should not be considered as a piece
of Dying declaration, so in the case by the information the deceased Kiran kumara was in a fit
state of mind as there is no point to prove unfitness of her mind when she made the statement.
So an inference can be drawn that when she wrote the statements and narrated all the
happenings which resulted in her death, she was mentally fit.

The counsel further submits that the fitness of the Kiran kumara is drawn by an inference
depending upon the situations and circumstances and presumption can be made for the same, as
it was held in the case of- koli chunni lal savji v. state of Gujarat, that no medical certificate of
doctor is necessary to check the fitness of the mind of the person making the statements declaring
the cause of his death.

The same was held in the case of Laxman v. state of Maharashtra (SC) that certificate of doctor
to test the fitness of the dying person is not mandatory. It was said that certificate of doctor or
medical expert to check the fitness of the person making it is just a rule of law, and it is not an
essential element for any statement to be considered as a valid Dying declaration.

6-Dying declaration can be made to any person whether police officer, magistrate, doctor or any
other person, so the diary which was recovered from Kiran kumara's room contains all the
circumstances which relates or which resulted in to her death, which was the cruelty by demand of
dowry.

7- It should be recorded in Question & answer form- The counsel submits that although a dying
declaration should be recorded in a Q & A form to strengthen its validity but it was held in the
case of -State of Karnataka V.Shariff, that the recording of dying declaration to be in Q & A form
is only an advisory opinion and not mandatory in all cases. Any statement could not be rejected
merely on the ground that it was not recorded in Q&A form.

It is to be submitted before the hon'ble court that any statement which relates to cause of the
death or which relates the circumstances of transactions which resulted in to the death if fulfils all
the essential elements mentioned therein under sec-32 (1) can be made as a sole basis for
conviction of the accused, as was held in the leading case of- khusal Rao v. state of Bombay, in
this case the court overruled various judgements which said that dying declaration cannot be
made sole basis for conviction but should be corroborated with some other material evidence, but
Page 28 of 38

in this case it was held that a dying declaration can be made a sole basis for conviction if it fulfils
all the essentials and there is no requirement of corroboration of other evidences.

Also it was held in the case of- Purushottam Chopra v. state (Government of NCT Delhi) that
dying declaration can be made sole basis for conviction of the accused if it is voluntary, truthful
and made in a fit state of mind.

The same was held in the case of Jayamma V. state of Karnataka that a dying declaration can
be made sole basis for conviction if it passes all the tests of veracity and genuineness.

The counsel further submits that the diary written by Kiran kumara should be considered as a
piece of dying declaration as it fulfils all the essential elements of section-32 (1) of IEA,1872 . As
the chain of circumstances which resulted in to the death of Kiran kumara is not broken and
relationship between the cause of her death and circumstances of transactions which resulted in
to her death remains static and makes it clear the death of Kiran kumara was due to the mental
cruelty in demand of dowry by her husband.

It is to be further submitted that the diary by Kiran kumara could be said as the suicidal note, and
the element of admissibility of such note or declaration was considered in the case of- Sharad
Birdhi Chand sarda V. state of Maharashtra.

1st LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

2. WHETHER SECTION 304B AND SECTION 488A OF IPC ,1860 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble court that the section 498A and section 304B shall not
be unconstitutional as both of these sections are laid down by the legislature in order to protect the
women from any sort of cruelty, torture or harassment. These two sections are basically a shield
given by the legislature to the women's of the nation to use whenever needed, these implications
were made to control crime rates which were speedily increasing day by day.

Also another amendment related to same issue was made and it resulted into insertion of an act ;
i.e., Dowry prohibition act.
In case of Inder Raj Malik and others v. Sumita Malik.; contended that this section is ultra vires
Article 14 and Article 20 (2) of the Constitution. There is the Dowry Prohibition Act which also
deals with similar types of cases;
Therefore, both statutes together create a situation commonly known as double jeopardy. But
Delhi High Court negatives this contention and held that this section does not create situation for
double jeopardy. Section 498A is distinguishable from Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
because in the latter mere demand of dowry is punishable and existence of element of cruelty is
not necessary, whereas Section 498A deals with aggravated form of the offence. It punishes such
Page 29 of 38

demands of property or valuable security from the wife or her relatives as are coupled with cruelty
to her. Hence a person can be prosecuted in respect of both the offences punishable under
Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and this section.
As the facts of the case Chottelal kumar v. state of indiva are concerned ;
1. Dairy written by the deceased already say is all, that can be considered as a piece of dying
declaration and also it can result to the conviction of the accused. The admission of dying
declaration is indicated in legal maxim "nemo moriturus praesumitur mentiri” which based on the
principle- that a dying man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth.
2. The post mortem report of the deceased depicts that the lady was been through torture and
harassment by her husband.
The medical reports consist of facts such as the body has the ecchy mosis and on dissection of
which ligature marks was found, also congested trachea etc.
All these facts and circumstances joins the nexus between the cause of her death.

3.Accused after second demand also apologized to the deceased and promised to keep her
happy, this shows that the accused was the only person who was behind those consistent
demands, and by nature he was greedy and when he didn't get the complete amount which he
demanded he abetted her wife to commit suicide.

4. The death wasn't natural , as the suicide was committed after the incomplete payment of the
demand by deceased father.
All these circumstances can be helpful to draw a conclusion of death.
Another cases such as ; KANS RAJ V. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ; in this case it was
contented that the plaintiff Sunita Kumari was married or 9 July 1985 , she was found dead on
23rd October 1988 at the residence of her in laws at batata Punjab , the death wasn't ordinary, as
the circumstances resulted into the death . On post mortem it was found that the deceased had
injuries on her body. the marks of 20 X 20 CM on front and write left side of the neck and reddish
brown in colour. The case was registered under section 306 IPC.
Conclusion; matters of the dowry death which is not Pawan Kumar and others v. of state of
Haryana
The Dowry prohibition Act defines meaning of dowry under the section 2 of the act which says
that any property or the valuable demand of the dowry .
In the present cases the circumstantial evidences plays a key roll connect the nexus between
cause and death of individual.
Judgement by AP Mishra:
say that "for more than a century inspired of the of the tall words of respect for women there has
been an onslaught on their liberties through bride burning and dowry death . This has cost anxiety
to the legislators Judiciary and law enforcing Agencies who have attempted to reserve them from
these social Choke . There has been series of legislations without much effect this leads to the
passing of dowry prohibition act in 1961 and also amendment in IPC and Evidence Act as well, but
still this stringent activities is carried forward and not because of the lack of legislation but because
of the protective jurisprudence which says that Benefit Of , Doubt,
The consideration to charge under section 304b and 498 is :
1. whether the women has been subjected to any cruelty by her husband or by the appearance
soon before the death.
2.whether the same was for or in correction with any demand of the dowry.
Page 30 of 38

these parameters was delivered under the scales by the justice AP Mishra.
secondly prohibition and give the definition of dowry with means any property or a valuable
security given by agreed to be given in the directly or indirectly by anyone party to the marriage for
other party to the marriage or by any other to any other person.
In the case of Bhaskar laal Sharma and anr V. Maonica; it was contented that in order to
attract the offence under section 498A it would have to be prove that the wife was subjected to
cruelty, whether the conduct was such as to cause Grave injury or danger to the mental health of
the women in all the matters.
This to be examined only after the detailed inquiry is done by the prosecution.
The Parliament by the act number 46 of 1983 with a view to combat the menace of dowry death
and harassment to the women by her husband or his relatives, introduce section 498A and 304B.
Explanation to which says that ;

1.Any will full conduct which is of such a nature as it likely to drive the women to commit suicide or
to cause Grave injury or danger to life or limb or the health whether mental or physical of the
women.
2.or harassment of the women, where such harassment is with a view to coercing her on any
person, related to meet anyone, any unlawful demand of any property etc.
In case of SHER SINGH PARTAPA V. STATE Of HARYANA : it was contented that out the
outset we shall briefly analyse the cauldron of the legislation passed by the Parliament on the
subject which were presently engaged with the confrontment pestilential and proliferation of the
incident of married women being put to death because of the avaricious and insaliable dowry
demands and brides been driven to take their own life because of the cruelty melted how to them
by their husband and his family , also because of the dowry expectation so the dowry prohibition
act came by the passing legislation , still the cases were not in controls, with the another provision
that is Section 498 in order to deal effectively not only with the dowry death but also the cases of
cruelty to married women by their in laws .
This Section 498 does not employ the word dowry but it has the essence the amendment makes
the matrimonial cruelty to the wife punishable with the imprisonment extended 3 years with fine.
Within 3 years of the amendment by which 498A was inserted the Parliament realise the necessity
to make the law more stringent and effective introducing the amendment section 304b was
inserted into IPC the new the newly added section .
In the case of; Rajinder Singh V. State Of Punjab; it is contended that sati and dowry deaths
have plagued this nation for centuries. Abd this needs to be stopped because such cases badly
affect the community at large.
In case of Sultan Singh V. State Of Haryana; held that the homicidal deaths , suicide or non-
accidental deaths are subject to section 498A of IPC, and those deaths are considered as
unnatural deaths.

1 of 157
Page 31 of 38

1st LEX EXPLORE NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETETITION

WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT GIVEN BY LEARNED TRIAL COURT AND HONBLE SUPREME COURT IS ERRONEOUS?

t is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the judgement given by learned trial court and
hon'ble high court is not erroneous as the diary which is written by deceased kiran kumara can be
used as the circumstantial evidence and the conviction can be done on the sole basis of that dying
declaration. , as the circumstances at which kiran kumara died does discloses the fact that the
chhote laal kumar is guilty .

It is to be submitted before the hon'ble Apex court that the judgement by the Trial court and High
court is correct.

As the Trial court and High court held Chhotelal kumar is guilty of the offences of sec-304B and
sec-498A of the IPC, 1860.(define both the sections) such decision seems to be accurate and not
erroneous.

It is to be contended that the death of deceased was due to the behaviour of accused chhote laal,
he practiced cruelty and tortured her wife, which result into the death of deceased.
The demand of dowry by chhotelal kumar and the death of kiran kumara is almost 2 years, but
mean while he was continuously harassing her, which was clear in the post mortem report
Few days after he asked for the apology again there was demand of 60lakhs, And when accused
only got half of the demanded amount, he abetted the deceased to commit suicide.
On 10september 2022 he demanded for money and within a month she died of strangulation due
to suicide at her matrimonial home.

It is to be submitted on behalf of the respondent that in the case the chain of evidences and the
diary written by deceased are sufficient ground which reflects the guilt of Chhotelal kumar. From
the facts, the essential elements of both the offences (304-B and 498-A) are satisfied. As the
death was the result of cruelty by the husband within 7 years of marriage.

The deceased kiran kumara died within 7 years of her marriage and such death is not natural, this
statement and fact is enough to make the appellant guilty. The corroboration of facts and
circumstances must draw the grounds which make Chhotelal kumar guilty. in the instant case, the
circumstances which resulted in the death of the deceased throws a suspicion as to cause of the
death of the kiran kumara.

Also it is to be argued that, the main essential of section 304b and 498A satisfied due to demand
of dowry, and death was caused by husband within 7 years of marriage by husband or relative of
husband.
Page 32 of 38

The learned trial court and hon’ble high court had dismissed the appeal of the appellant , as the
appellant had taken the plea of alibi, which means that at the time when the death occurred he
was prima facie not present but he was in office.

This plea of alibi was not enough to prove his innocence beyond reasonable doubt as the
circumstances of the case depicts something else.
Plea of alibi is a rule of evidence recognized by Section 11 of the Evidence Act that facts
inconsistent with fact in issue are relevant. However it cannot be the sole link or sole circumstance
to bare conviction. When one fact is necessary to the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, but
strikingly absent in the chain of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution case certainly will fail.
Because, an alibi the relevancy of which is totally inconsistence with hypothesis that the accused
had committed an offence. When the accused took the plea of alibi the burden of proof lies on him
under section 103 of this Act. If a person is charged with murder he is to prove that he was
elsewhere. The plea of alibi has to be taken at the earliest opportunity and it has to be proved to
the satisfaction of the court.

In the case of :Sundar laal v. State ; it was contended from the facts of the case, that the
deceased Rameshvari devi committed suicide by burning herself and it was due to the behaviour
of her husband .
As there was 8 witnesses who gave the statement against the husband that he was not anywhere
else but he came late at night and both fought and result to which the lady burned herself , and to
escape form the situation the accused ran by locking the door from outside.
After inquiring all these evidences and statement the court dismissed the appeal of plea of alibi
and contended the accused guilty for section 304b and 498A of the ipc.

In most of the cases it becomes very difficult for the accused to prove his innocence beyond the
reasonable doubt.
As the law in such cases are really strict.
In case of ; Binay Kumar Singh vs State of Bihar, (1997) 1 SCC 283
We must bear in mind that alibi, not an exception (special or general) envisaged in the Indian
Penal Code or any other law. It is only a rule of evidence recognized in Section 11 of the Evidence
Act that facts which are inconsistent with the fact in issue are relevant.

(a) When the defence of alibi fails-Failure on the part of accused to establish plea of alibi does not
help the prosecution and it cannot be held that the accused was present at the scene of
occurrence, the prosecution must prove it by positive evidence. Thus the mere failure on the part
of the accused to establish the plea of alibi, shall not lead to an inference that the accused was
present at the scene of occurrence.
In case Puspender Singh and Ors v. State ; it was: contended that From the facts of the cases
that the lady was found dead and the husband was charged under section 302 and 304b of IPC.
Where the husband took the plea of alibi for defence but as per the autopsy report it was shown
that the deceased having suffered a cut throat incised wound on front and side of the neck. On the
left side, the injury showed four tapering ends and on the right side there was indication of three
multiple attempts at causing similar injury of the size of 11 cm X 5 cm. The trachea had been cut
at two places, on right side to the extent of 5 cm X 3 cm, 8 cm below left ear. The thyroid, cricoid,
and trachea rings with both sides of neck muscles and vessels had been cut and bisected. In the
opinion of the autopsy doctor, the cut throat injury was ante-mortem in nature and had been
inflicted by sharp-edged weapon, death having occurred due to haemorrhagic shock resulting from
such injuries, 12-14 hours prior to the autopsy. The autopsy doctor had preserved the blood-
stained clothes. And such plea was dismissed by the hon'ble court and the accused was held
guilty under section 302 and 304B of IPC
Page 33 of 38

It is to be noted that the Plea Of Alibi involves the question of fact that both the courts below have
concurrently found that against the appellant.

PRAYER
IN THE LIGHTS OF THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASES, ISSUES RAISED , ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AND SUCH
AUTHORITIES CITED , THE COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT HUMBLY PRAYS BEFORE THE
HON,BLE APEX COURT TO ADJUDGE AND DECLARE THAT ;

 THE DIARY WRITTEN BY DECEASED KIRAN KUMARA SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS PIECE OD DYING
DECLARATION .

 THE SECTION 304B AND SECTION 498A SHOULD BE CONSTITUTIONAL.

 THE JUDGEMENT BY THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT AND HON,BLE HIGH COURT IS NOT ERRONEOUS.

The counsel humbly pleads before the hon’ble court on behalf of the respondent to pass any order pr
decree , as it may deem fit in interest of justice.

And for this act of kindness the counsel shall duty bound forever prays before the Hon’ble court.

ALL OF WHICH IS HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY –

Counsel on behalf of the respondent
Page 34 of 38

MOOT PREPOSITION
1. Mr Chhotelal kumar and Kiran kumari marriage was solemnised on 01/01/2020 as per Hindu
ceremonies. Chhotelal kumar was an engineer and Kiran kumari was a reputed doctor. Kiran

kumari was the daughter of a prominent politician of the country. Since the day of matrimonial

ties Chhotelal Kumar and Kiran kumari matrimonial life was in doldrums. Kiran kumari stayed

for 20 days in her matrimonial home and returned to her parents’ home and told them that her

husband is demanding dowry, a luxury car. Her father gave rupees 10 Lakhs and sent her back to

matrimonial home.

2. Chhotelal kumar again demanded rupees 50 lakhs for purchasing a plot. On 5th August, 2020

Chhotelal kumar took his wife and left her in her parents’ house and told them that Kiran kumari

could get back to matrimonial home only upon the payment of Rs. 50 lakhs. After few days

Chhotelal kumar had a change of heart and he brought the wife back to his home and also

apologised her and promised to keep her happy.

3. On 10th September, 2022 Kiran Kumari went to her father and told him that Chhotelal kumar is

asking rupees 60 lakhs. Kiran’s father gave her rupees 30 lakhs and promised to give the remaining

balance soon and sent back Kiran to her matrimonial home.

4. On 15th October, 2022 at about 9:00 am Kiran kumari died of strangulation due to suicide at her
Page 35 of 38

matrimonial home.

5. Father of Kiran kumari lodged a FIR to police that his daughter was murder by Chhotelal Kumar

because of dowry. The police registered the fir, held the inquest over the dead body and sent the

same for post-mortem.

6. As the dead body was highly decomposed, the Doctors referred the same to the Head of the

Department of Forensic Medicine, Medical College. The Head of the Department of Forensic

Medicine examined the body and found a ligature mark around the neck and on dissection of the

ligature mark he found that ecchy mosis were present, trachea was congested and was containing

bloody froth. He also found a contusion over the chin. The Doctor also found several other

contusions on the hands, axilla and other parts of the body. He opined that the death was due to

strangulation. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed under Section 304B

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against Chhotelal kumar. During investigation, police recovered a

diary written by Kiran wherein she had narrated how her husband use to make demands for dowry.

The plea of the accused was one of denial and he stated that when he returned from his office in

the evening and entered the room, he found the deceased hanging from the hook in the ceiling. He

got nervous and thus could not intimate the police. He took the plea of alibi and adduced the

evidence to show that he was in office during the time of offence

7. The trial court having examined the evidence of the material witnesses held that this is a case of

strangulation and therefore the death was unnatural and that there was demand for dowry and there

was cruelty on the part of the accused and accordingly convicted him under Sections 304-B and

498-A I.P.C and awarded sentence of imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under

Section 304-B I.P.C. The learned trial court, considered the diary as the dying declaration. The

trial court did not go into the plea of alibi. On appeal the Hon’ble High Court agreed with the

conclusions reached by the trial court and dismissed the appeal.

8. Chhotelal kumar filed a Special Leave Petition to Supreme Court under Article 136 of the
Page 36 of 38

Constitution of Indiva.

9. The Supreme Court decided to hear the petition and framed the following questions for

consideration.

I. Whether the Special Leave Petition filed by Chhotelal is maintainable?

II. Whether the diary written by Kiran kumara can be considered as a piece of dying

declaration?

III. Whether the judgement of Learned Trial Court and Hon’ble High Court is erroneous?

IV. Whether section 304B & Section 498A of IPC, 1860 is unconstitutional?
Page 37 of 38
Page 38 of 38

CERTIFICATE ISSUED