IN THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF KALINGA

SUIT NO: …………………

UNDER THE ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF KALINGA

[Link]:…………………

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE OF KALINGA -------------------------------------

(RESPONDENT)

V.

MR. VIKRAM -----------------------------------------------(APPELLANT)

MEMORAMDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
1. List of cases
2. Statute
3. Books
4. Website
2. Statement of jurisdiction

3. Statement of facts

4. Statement of issues

5. Summary of Argument

6. Arguments Advanced

7. Prayer

2
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

Index of Authorities

CASES
[Link] Mishra v. State

[Link] K. S . Puttaswami v. Union of India

[Link] v. State of Kerala

[Link] Coleman v. Union of India

[Link] Venkata Sree Nagesh v. State of A .P

[Link] v. The State

[Link] Police Station v. Jospeh Rodrigue

[Link] v. Union of India

[Link] Kendra v. Union of India

[Link] of Maharastra v. Ankur Panwar

Books:

1. P . S PILLAI , INDIAN PENAL CODE ,1860

2. RATANLAL DHIRAJLAL, INDIAN PENAL CODE
3. V . N SHUKLA , INDIAN CONSTITUTION

3
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

Website:

1. [Link]
2. [Link]
3. [Link]

4
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The respondent humbly submits this memorandum in response to appeal field before
Honourable Supreme Court in criminal appellant jurisdiction under Article 132 1 of the
Kalingan constitution .

1
Appellant jurisdiction of the supreme court in appeal from high courts in certain cases :-
(1)An appeal shall lie to the supreme court from any judgment , decree or final order of a high
court in the territory of india , whether in a civil , criminal or other proceeding , [if the high court
certifies under the article 134A ] that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of this constitution .
(2) Where such a certificate is given , any party in the case may appeal to the supreme court on
the ground that any such question as aforesaid has been wrongly decided .
Explanation:- For the purposes of this article , the expression “final order “includes an order
deciding an issues which , if decided in favour of the appellant , would be sufficient for the final
disposal of the case .
5
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

STATEMENT OF FACTS

(1)The union of kalinga got its independence in the year 1947 from the rigours and clutches of
the British colonization . A constituent assembly was formed to draft a constitution of its own .
After almost three years of hard works and toil a supreme document was created which becomes
the lengthiest constitution in the world .

(2) Freedom of media and press are fully ensured .The founding father of the constitution were
well aware of the fact that without a free and fair media , a democracy would hardly sustain .
Media is regarded as the ‘fourth pillar ‘ of the democracy . Under the fundamental rights to ‘
freedom of speech and expression ‘ , the freedom of press and media are implicit . Therefore ,
they are granted all the rights to freely gather , examine , analyse and publish news which may
concern the public as a whole .

(3) Mithila was an eastern provinces / state in the union of kalinga . Vikram Dubay (23) is the
son of a renowned politician , MR. Ranjit Dubay who is a forefront leader of the ruling party of
the state. Ms. Shamaira khan (22) is the daughter of Mr. Abu Sayed khan who was a middleclass
government servant . Vikram and Shamaira met each other in their college and fall in love with
each other . Day by Day their intimacy blossomed beyond bounds and they started to keep
sexual relationship .

(4) Vikram started to seek frequent sexual favours from the girl , he tried to establish sexual
relationship against the order of nature . This made the lady reluctant to continue with the
relationship . She started to avoid Vikram and denied his every attempts to keep physical
relationship . In spite of this , the boy often chased her under the several pretexts .

(5) Mr. Abu Sayed khan filed an F.I.R. alleging that the Vikram along with his two friends
forcibly abducted the lady when she was out for some shopping purpose on 12 th march 2018 . He
further complained that they attempted to penetrate their male organs to the private part of the
lady . Shamaira tried to resist them and endeavored to escape from their holds . Such resistance
enraged the men and they poured acid on her body which resulted in severe burn injuries on her

6
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

face and middle part of the body. They threw out of the vehicle and escaped from the scene .She
was admitted in hospital by the help of a few passer by individuals.

(6) The incident and instances of acid attack in the union of kalinga are in rise day by day . They
have come to be disastrous for certain innocent human being, especially girls who fall prey to
the grudges of some anti social persons. Mr. Surendra Mahalik, a social activist felt the necessity
of a legislative measures to regulate the sale of acid and other coercive substances. Unguided
and unregularized access to those substance has become hazardous to the well - being of society.

(7) Mr. Surendra Mahalik urged the attention of the supreme judicial Authority in the matter
through a P.I.L. He prayed the Honourable court to issue a writ of mandamus to the parliament
implement a suitable law to control and regulate the sale of acid and other coercive and chemical
substances which may be detrimental to the interest of the society .

(8) On the basis of these facts, police conducted investigation and finally submitted the
chargesheet in the learned trial court for the charges under section 376,377,307,354D and 326A
r/w section 34 against the Vikram and under section 376, 307 and 326A r/w section 34 of K.P.C.
, 1860 , against his two friends .The trail court ultimately found the accused persons guilty of
the offences alleged and sentenced them to imprisonment for life .

(9) Aggrieved by the decision of the trial court, the accused persons moved to the high court of
Mithila in appeals against their convictions. The high court of Mithila after hearing the appeals
upheld the decision of the learned trial court . Again , aggrieved by the decision of the high court
, they preferred an appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme court .

(10) The accused was from a political family , the entire matter got a very high media coverage .
The details of both the boy and girl and their family were aired in televised media shows
repeatedly . The media houses hardly hesitated to disclose the identity of the victim as a result
which the dignity and the honour of the girl’s family was disgraced . They , especially the girl
was socially ostracized . It become very difficult to for her to lead a dignified life any further .
Being the victim of excess media trail ,She field a writ petition in the Honourable Apex court of
kalinga under Article 32 of the constitution for the violation of her fundamental rights and
failure of print as well as electronic media to comply with the obligation under section 228 A of
K.P.C ,1860.

7
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

(1)Whether the impugned matters are maintainable before the Hon’ble Supreme court ?

(2) Whether the conviction of the accused persons under the alleged charges are
sustainable in the eyes of law ?

(3) Whether the fundamental rights of the prosecutrix got violated by the acts of media and
press?

(4) Whether the non- availability of suitable legislations to regulate the sale of acid and
other coercive substance is violative of constitutional provision ?

8
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
(1)Whether the impugned matters are maintainable before the Hon’ble Supreme court ?

(2) Whether the conviction of the accused persons under the alleged charges are
sustainable in the eyes of law ?

Yes , because Vikram started to seek frequent sexual favours from the girl , he tried to establish
sexual relationship against the order of nature . This made the lady reluctant to continue with the
relationship . She started to avoid Vikram and denied his every attempts to keep physical
relationship . In spite of this , the boy often chased her under the several pretexts . Vikram along
with his two friends forcibly abducted the lady and they attempted to penetrate their male organs
to the private part of the lady . Shamaira tried to resist them and endeavored to escape from their
holds . Such resistance enraged the men and they poured acid on her body which resulted in
severe burn injuries on her face and middle part of the body.

9
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

(3) Whether the fundamental rights of the prosecutrix got violated by the acts of media and
press?

Yes , the fundamental rights of the prosecutrix got violated by the acts of the media and press
under the Article 212 , Article 19 (1) (a)3 of the Indian constitution and section 228 A4 of I.P.C.

(4) Whether the non- availability of suitable legislations to regulate the sale of acid and
other coercive substance is violative of constitutional provision ?

Yes , Because the incident and instances of acid attack in the union of kalinga are in rise day by
day . They have come to be disastrous for certain innocent human being, especially girls who fall
prey to the grudges of some anti social persons. It violates the Article 19(1)(d) of the Indian
constitution .

2
Article 21 Right to personal liberty .
3
Article 19(1)(d) to move freely throughout the territory of india .
4
Section 228A of I.P.C. Disclosure of the identity of the victim of certain offences .
10
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

ARGUMENT ADVANCED

(1)Whether the impugned matters are maintainable before the Hon’ble Supreme court ?

It is most humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that the SLP filed by the
petitioner is not maintainable before this court. Article 136 of COI reads as follow:-

136. Special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court:-

(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant
special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause
or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India

(2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to any judgment, determination, sentence or order passed or
made by any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.

In decided cases, however, establish that the Supreme Court will grant Special leave in to appeal
in exceptional cases like:-

Where grave and substantial injustice has been done by disregards to the forms of legal process,
or violation of the principles of natural justice or otherwise.

It may be noted by this Learned Supreme Court that here in this case there is no grave injustice
and ignorance of substantial question of law. The decision given by the High Court is totally
based upon law without ignoring any substantial question of law.

11
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

(2) Whether the conviction of the accused persons under the alleged charges are
sustainable in the eyes of law ?

Yes , the conviction of the accused persons under the alleged charges are sustainable in the eyes
of law .Because the Actus Reus and Mens Rea are presented there and Vikram and his friends
are committing the with a common intention 5

Actus Reus the wrongful deed that comprises the physical components of a crime and that
generally must be coupled with mens rea to establish criminal liability .

Mens Rea 6 the state of mind that the prosecution , to secure a conviction , must prove that a
defendant had when committing a crime .

In Ghanshyam Mishra vs. State7, it was held that:-

“Even partial penetration leading to the rupture of the hymen is sufficient to constitute rape, even
though there might not be deep penetration into the vaginal canal. The girl's evidence was to the
effect that she felt severe pain and raised a cry, after which the petitioner desisted from the act.
Consequently, from the mere fact it cannot be assumed that the offence was not committed when
the fact showed clearly that there was penetration by the male organ. The depth of the
penetration is immaterial so far as the offence under Section 376 I. P. C. is concerned.”

It is that if consent be obtained by intimidation, force, mediated imposition, circumvention, and

surprise it is so to be treated as a delusion, and not as a deliberate or free act of mind.

It is to be noted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that in the present case, the accused
solicited sexual favors from the respondent and she was made reluctant to continue with
relationship on the ground that he tried to establish sexual relation against the order of nature.

Therefore the accused was rightly convicted under section 376 of KPC.

5
Section 34 of I.P.C. When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the
common intention of all , each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it
were done by him alone .
6
Blacks Law Dictionary 10th edt.
7
AIR 1951 ORI 78, 1957 CRILJ 469

12
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

(3) Whether the fundamental rights of the prosecutrix got violated by the acts of media and
press?

Yes , The fundamental rights Right to Privacy , freedom of speech and expression got
violated by the acts of the media and press .

3.1 Article 21 , Right to privacy

On 24th August 2017, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs
Union of India8 passed a historic judgment affirming the constitutional right to privacy. It
declared privacy to be an integral component of Part III of the Constitution of India, which lays
down our fundamental rights, ranging from rights relating to equality (Articles 14 to 18); freedom
of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a)); freedom of movement (Article 19(1)(d)); protection
of life and personal liberty (Article 21) and others. These fundamental rights cannot be given or
taken away by law, and all laws and executive actions must abide by them. In this case the eight-
judge bench decision in M P Sharma (1954), which held that the right to privacy is not protected
by the Constitution stands over-ruled; and

The Court’s subsequent decision in Kharak Singh (1962) also stands over-ruled to the extent
that it holds that the right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution

Emmanuel v State of Kerala9

In this case three children were expelled from school after they refused to sing the national
anthem of India. They refused to sing because it was against their religious faith in Jehovah’s
Witnesses. Through their representative, they filed a writ petition in the High Court of Kerala
State, seeking to restrain authorities from preventing their school attendance. They alleged that
their expulsion amounted to an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom expression
under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The High

13
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

Court dismissed the petition on the ground that no word or thought in the national anthem could
offend any religious beliefs.

Subsequently, they appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of India. The Court found their
expulsion in violation both Articles 19 and 25 of the Constitution, holding that a reasonable
limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on a “‘a law’ having statutory
force and not a mere executive or departmental instruction.” It found no provisions of law in the
country expressly obligates individuals to sing the national anthem and that the applicable
regulatory measures by the State of Kerala’s Department of Education lacked statutory force and
that were “mere departmental instructions.”

BENNET COLEMAN V. UNION OF INDIA10

In this case the petitioners challenged the restrictions on the import of newsprint under Import
Order 1955; the regulation of sale, acquisition, and use of newsprint under Newsprint Order
1962; and the direct regulation of size and circulation of newspapers under the Newsprint Policy
of 1972-73. They contended that these orders directly affected the right to freedom of speech and
expression under Article 19(1)(a) of India’s Constitution. The Supreme Court of India accepted
this contention and struck down the impugned orders as unconstitutional.

(4) Whether the non- availability of suitable legislations to regulate the sale of acid and
other coercive substance is violative of constitutional provision ?

The incident of acid attack has been increasing phenomena in India and the most of the victim of
the offence is especially women. While these attacks can be attributed to various factors such as
the social; weakness of women and the existence of male-dominated society.

Which raised the question of the Indian society as well as the laws which are not able to deal
with the problem? Acid is easily and inexpensively available weapon which makes it an ideal
tool for the perpetrator. Acid is easily accessible at any shop near to your house anyone can buy
it there is no restriction despite the Supreme Court has been passed the guidelines for the
regulation of the acid but the problem is an implementation of those guidelines.

10

14
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

The Compensation is an important part of this crime but in India, there is no Criminal Injuries
compensation Board yes we had heard much time that central government notify all states that
form a compensation board but there is no single board which worked on it.

Law in india

In India, there is no specific law which deals with the acid attack. Section 326A and 326B have
been added in the Code Vide Criminal law (Amendment) Act 13 of 2013 with the object of
making specific provisions for punishment in case of causing grievous hurt by use of acid etc. or
voluntarily throwing or attempting to throw acid causing permanent or partial damage, or
deformity to, or burns or maims or disfigures or disable any part of the body of that person.

Section 326 A of Indian penal Code says that – Whoever causes permanent or partial damage
or deformity to, or bums or maims or disfigures or disables, any part or parts of the body of a
person or causes grievous hurt by throwing acid on or by administering acid to that person, or by
using any other means with the intention of causing or with the knowledge that he is likely to
cause such injury or hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and with
fine;

Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses of the
treatment of the victim.

Provided further that any fine imposed under this section shall be paid to the victim.

Section 326B of Indian Penal Code says that- Whoever throws or attempt to throw acid on any
person or attempt to administer acid to any person, or attempt to use any other means, with the
intention of causing permanent or partial damage or deformity or burns or maiming or
disfigurement or disability or grievous hurt to that person, shall be punished with the
imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than five years but which
may extend seven years, and shall also liable to fine.

15
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

These sections inserted after the recommendation of the Justice [Link] Committee and it was
also a proposal of 226th Report of Law Commission of India which dealt particularly with acid
attack.

In Marepally Venkata Sree Nagesh Vs. State of A.P11, the accused was suspicious about the
character of his wife and inserted mercuric chloride into her vagina, she died due to renal failure.
The accused was charged and convicted under Section 302 and 307 IPC.

In Devanand Vs. The State12 a man threw acid on his estranged wife because she refused to
cohabit with him. The wife suffered permanent disfigurement and loss of one eye. The accused
was convicted under Section 307 and was imprisoned for 7 years.

State of Karnataka by Jalahalli Police Station vs. Jospeh Rodrigue 13it is one of the most

famous cases involving acid attack. The accused threw acid on a girl, Hasina, for refusing his job
offer. This deeply scarred her physical appearance changed the colour and appearance of her
face and left her blind. The accused was convicted under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced to
imprisonment for life. Compensation of Rs. 2, 00,000/- in addition to the Trial Court fine of Rs
3, 00,000 was to be paid by the accused to Hasina’s parents.

Landmark cases related to the Acid Attack

Laxmi v. Union of India14 This is a landmark case, in this case, the petition filed by the Laxmi
(Acid Victim). In this case, Apex Court issued the direction for the regulation of acid to the State
and UT. The court also addressed the problem of compensation. The Apex Court held that
Section 357A. This section provides for the preparation of a scheme for providing funds for the
purpose of compensation to the victim or his dependents who have suffered loss or injury as a
result of crime and who require rehabilitation. The Apex Court direct that the acid attacks
victims shall be paid compensation of at least Rs. 3 Lakh by the concerned State
Government/UT as the aftercare and rehabilitation cost.

11

12

13

14

16
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

But in reality, no state has set victim compensation scheme and the compensation ranging is
from 25,000 to 3Lakh depend upon the state to state which is not sufficient for the victim
because the acid attack victim will have to go through several plastic injuries in a whole life.

Parivartan Kendra Vs. Union of India15, In this case the PIL filed the petition for the plight of
acid attack victims like free medical care, rehabilitative service or adequate compensation under
Survivor Compensation Schemes- Highlighted plight of two Dalit girls – Acid attack victims. In
this case, court also took a consideration that despite orders and directions of the same court in
the Laxmi case, acid still readily available to most of the population in India. In this landmark
judgment Supreme Court issued a direction that the State Governments/ UT should seriously
discuss and take up the matter with all the private hospitals in their respective State/ UT to the
effect that the private hospitals should not refuse treatment to victims of acid attack and that full
treatment should be provided to such victims including medicines, food, bedding and
reconstructive surgeries. The Apex Court said that there is no need to set up a separate Criminal
Injuries Compensation Board and the Court also clarified that the State Government/UT
concerned can give even more amount of compensation more than Rs. 3Lakh.

The Court also said that the State Government/ UT should take a stringent action be taken
against those erring persons supplying acid without proper authorization and also the concerned
authorities be made responsible for failure to keep a check on the distribution of the acid.

(Preeti Rathi Case) State  of Maharashtra v. Ankrur Panwar16, in the first such order in an
acid attack in Maharashtra a special women’s Court here sentenced Ankur Panwar to death. The
accused was convicted of the charge of throwing acid on Preeti Rathi at Bandra station in 2013
after she chose to pursue her nursing career, declining his proposal for marriage. Special Judge
Anju S. Shende said “According to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, the facts of
the case and the recent acid attack judgments by the Supreme Court, the accused to death.

15

16

17
 Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent

Prayer

Wherefore in the light of facts presented, issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities
cited, the Counsels on behalf of the Defendant humbly pray before this Hon’ble Court that it
may be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

1. The appeal is not maintainable before the Honorable supreme court.

2. The charges are sustainable in the eyes of law .

Or pass any other order that the court may deem fit in the light of equity, justice and good
conscience and for this Act of kindness of Your Lordships the Respondent shall as duty bound
ever pray.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

Sd/- Mohd Sakib

Counsels for the Respondent

Reg. No. GU17R0032

B.A LL.B 2ND Year (4th Sem)

18