TEAM CODE: TC 19

FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY

2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

BEFORE THE HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT OF INDIANIA

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NO.: 13789 / 2023

UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIANIA

HELPING INDIANIA LABOUR NGO APPELLANT

VS.

BANSAK SETH RESPONDENT

FOR OFFENCES CHARGED UNDER:

SECTION 306 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE JUDGE

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDANT (BANSAK SETH)

0
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S. PARTICULARS PAGE
NO. NO.
1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3–5

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 6

3. TABLE OF CASES 7–8

4. BOOKS 8

5. WEBSITES 9 – 10

6. STATUTES REFERRED 11

7. LEGAL DATABASES 11

8. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 12

9. STATEMENT OF FACTS 13 – 14

10. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 15

11. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS 16 – 17

12. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED 18 – 27

1
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

13. ISSUE – I 18 – 20

WHETHER THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE

BEFORE THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT?
14. ISSUE – II 21 – 22

HOW CAN NGO WHICH IS NEITHER A VICTIM NOR A

DEFACTO COMPLAINIANT FILE A SLP?
15. ISSUE – 111 23 – 27

ASSUMING SLP TO BE MAINTAINABLE WHETHER

PROCEEDINGS ARE LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AGAINST
BANSAK SETH?
16. PRAYER 28

2
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

LIST OF ABBREVIATION’S

1. AIR: All India Reporter

2. A.P: Andhra Pradesh
3. Adv.: Advance
4. AIR: All India Reporter
5. All: Allahabad
6. All: Allahabad High Court
7. Anr’s.: Another’s
8. Art.: Article
9. Bom. HC: Bombay High Court
10. Bom. LR: Bombay Law Reporter
11. Bom: Bombay
12. C.C: Chargesheet
13. C.G: Chhattisgarh
14. C.J: Chief Justice
15. Cal: Calcutta
16. Cal: Calcutta High Court
17. Co.: Company
18. Corp.: Corporation
19. COVID-19: Corona Virus Disease 2019
20. CPC: Civil Procedure Code
21. Cr.P.C.: Code of Criminal Procedure
22. Cri LJ / Cr LJ: Criminal Law Journal
23. Crl. P.: Criminal Petition
24. CrPC: Criminal Procedure Code
25. Del: Delhi
26. Del: Delhi
27. Dt.: Dated
28. Dy.: Deputy
29. Edn.: Edition
30. Edn: Edition
3
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

31. FC: Federal Court

32. FIR: First Information Report
33. GLR: Gazette Law Report
34. Guj: Gujarat
35. HC: High Court
36. HC: High Court
37. Hon’ble: Honourable
38. IC: Indian Cases
39. IEA: Indian Evidence Act
40. ILR: Indian Law Reports
41. IPC: Indian Penal Code
42. ITR: Income Tax Reports
43. Jt.: Joint
44. Ltd: Limited
45. M.M: Metropolitan Magistrate
46. M/S: Messrs
47. Mad: Madras
48. MH.: Maharashtra
49. NCT: National Capital Territory
50. NGO: Non-Governmental Organization
51. No: Number
52. Or’s: Others
53. Ori: Orissa
54. P and H: Punjab and Haryana
55. P.A: Personal Assistant
56. P.P: Public Prosecutor
57. p: Page
58. PC: Privy Council
59. PIL: Public Interest Litigation
60. Pl.: Plaintiff
61. PMR: Post-mortem Report
62. pp: Pages
63. Pt.: Petition
4
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

64. Pvt.: Private

65. Raj: Rajasthan
66. S/d: Sign of Deponent
67. SC: Supreme Court
68. SC: Supreme Court
69. SCC: Supreme Court Cases
70. SCC: Supreme Court Cases
71. SCJ: Supreme Court Journal
72. SCR: Supreme Court Reporter
73. SCR: Supreme Court Reports
74. Sec.: Section
75. Sec.: Section
76. Sept.: September
77. SLP: Special Leave Petition
78. Ss.: Sections
79. Supt.: Superintendent
80. U.O.I: Union of India
81. U/s: Under Section
82. V/vs: Versus
83. v: Versus
84. vol.: Volume
85. W.B: West Bengal

5
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

1. CASE LAWS
2. BOOKS
3. LEGAL DATABASES
4. STATUES REFERRED
5. WEBSITES

6
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

TABLE OF CASES

S. CASE - LAW CITATION

NO.

1. PRITAM SINGH V THE STATE AIR 1950 SC 169IR

1950 SC 169A

2. MC MEHTA V UNION OF INDIA AIR 2004 SC

4618AIR 2004 SC
4618
3. AERO TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED V RAVINDER AIR 2005 SC
KUMAR SURI 15AIR 2005 SC 15

4. SECRETARY, STATE OF KARNATAKA V AIR 2006 SC

UMADEVI 1806AIR 2006 S

5. SHIVANAND GAURISHANKAR BASWANTI V (2008)13 SCC 323

LAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS 9

6. KUNNHAYAMMED V. STATE OF KERALA (2000) 245 ITR 360

(SC)

7. RAJUBHAI DHAMIRBHAI BARIA V STATE OF 2004 CRiLJ 771

GUJARAT

8. SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY V. RAJU (2014) 8 SCC 390

9. ARUNACHALAM V. P.S.R. SADHANANTHAM (1979) 2 SCC

297(1979) 2 SCC
297
10. GEORGE PENTAIAH V. STATE OF ANDHRA 2009 (1) SCC
PRADESH 4462009 (1) SCC
446

7
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

11. SHEONATH SINGH V. SUJATA II (2007) DMC 601

12. R P KAPUR V. STATE OF PUNJAB 1960 AIR 1862, SC

13. ABHISHEK GUPTA AND OTHERS V. NCT OF CRL.MC.1064/2022

DELHI AND OTHERS

14. MOHAN LAL V. MANAGEMENT, BHARAT AIR 1981 SC 1253

ELECTRONICS LTD.

15. ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH V. STATE OF AIR 2004 SC 3467

GUJARAT

BOOKS

1. H.M. Seervai, Constitutional Law of India (4th edn. Vol 1 2010)

2. D. D. Basu Commentary on The Constitution of India, Vol. 3, 3138 (8th ed., Lexis Nexis
Butterworth Wadhwa Publications, Nagpur, 2008)

3. M P Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, (7th ed., Lexis-Nexis Butterworth Wadhwa, Nagpur,
2015)

4. Volume 6, Commentary on The Constitution of India, Durga Das Basu,8th Edition,2010. 5.

Volume 7, Commentary on The Constitution of India, Durga Das Basu,8th Edition,2010. 6.
Mulla The Code of Civil Procedure, 14th Edition,2005

7. R.V. Kelkar’s Lectures on Criminal Procedure including Probation and Juvenile Justice,
Sixth edition by K.N. Chandrasekharan Pillai

8. LexisNexis Ratanlal and Dhirajlal Code of Criminal Procedure, 22nd Edition by Justice
M.L. Singhal

9. Lexis Nexis the Indian Evidence Act by V NAGESWARA RAO Edition 2022

8
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

WEBSITES

1. Pankaj Tyagi, Quashing of FIR under section 482 of CRPC, Corpbiz (Apr. 5, 2022),
https://corpbiz.io/learning/quashing-of-fir-under-section-482-of-crpc/.
2. SC Allows NGO To File Appeal Against HC Order Upholding Asthana's Appointment
As Delhi PC, https://thewire.in/law/sc-allows-ngo-to-file-appeal-against-hc-order-
upholding-asthanas-appointment-as-delhi-pc.
3. Quashing Of FIR- Legal Rights for False and Forged First Information Report and
Complaints, https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3823-quashing-of-fir-
legal-rights-for-false-and-forged-first-information-report-and-complaints.html.
4. Laws around Working Hours in India, https://singhania.in/practice-
areas/employment/laws-around-working-hours-in-india.
5. Quashing of FIR/Criminal Proceedings Under Section 482 of CrPC,
https://legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-187-quashing-of-fir-criminal-proceedings-
under-section-482-of-crpc.html.
6. Live Law, FIR & Chargesheet Can Be Quashed If Allegations Or Evidence Do Not
Establish Commission Of An Offence: Delhi High Court, (Mar. 17, 2022),
https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/fir-chargesheet-can-be-quashed-if-allegations-
or-evidence-do-not-establish-commission-of-an-offence-delhi-high-court-194414.
7. Advocate Dhrubaraj Bhowmik, after filing the charge sheet can I go to H.C for
quashing the case, FREE LEGAL ADVICE https://lawrato.com/criminal-legal-
advice/after-filing-the-charge-sheet-can-i-go-to-hc-for-quashing-the-case-101204.
8. Delhi Government Hikes Minimum Wages of Unskilled, Skilled Workers,
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/delhi-governement-hikes-minimum-wages-of-
unskilled-skilled-workers-3426099.
9. Rachit Garg, Article 136 of the Indian Constitution - iPleaders, IPleaders (July 6,
2022), https://blog.ipleaders.in/article-136-of-the-indian-constitution/.
10. Nidhi Jacob, explained: Is Attempt to Suicide a Punishable Offence in India?
Factchecker (Sept. 26, 2022), https://www.factchecker.in/explained/explained-is-
attempt-to-suicide-a-punishable-offence-in-india-836440 .
11. Rachit Garg, Section 306 IPC case laws - iPleaders, IPleaders (Sept. 25, 2022),
https://blog.ipleaders.in/section-306-ipc-case-laws/.

9
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

12. Shivanand Gaurishankar Baswanti Vs Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills., Legal Authority
https://www.legalauthority.in/judgement/shivanand-gaurishankar-baswanti-vs-laxmi-
vishnu-textile-mills-13457.
13. https://www.prashantkanha.com/effect-of-dismissal-of-special-leave-petition-by-
supreme-court-and-doctrine-of-merger/.
14. LI Network, [Landmark Judgement] Madhu Limaye v/s State of Maharashtra (1977),
Law Insider India (Oct. 23, 2022), https://www.lawinsider.in/judgment/landmark-
judgement-madhu-limaye-v-s-state-of-maharashtra-1977.
15. Abetment to Suicide an offence under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860,
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4864-abetment-to-suicide-an-offence-
under-section-306-of-indian-penal-code-ipc-1860.html.
16. IPC Section 306 - Abetment of Suicide, Indian Kanoon
https://www.lawtendo.com/indian-kanoon/ipc/section-306.

10
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

STATUES REFERRED

1 Constitution Of India, 1949

2 Cr.P.C, 1973

3 Indian Evidence Act, 1872

4 IPC, 1860

LEGAL DATABASES:

1. Manupatra
2. SCC Online
3. Indian Kanoon
4. Lexis Advance
5. Lexis Nexis
6. EBC Reader

11
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE RESPONDENT HAVE THE HONOUR TO SUBMIT BEFORE THE HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, THE MEMORANDUM FOR THE RESPONDENT IN AN
APPEAL FILED BY APPELLANT UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA, 1950

THE RESPONDENT WOULD LIKE TO HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT THIS SPECIAL

LEAVE FOR APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE.

THE PRESENT MEMORANDUM SETS FORTH THE FACTS, CONTENTIONS AND

ARGUMENTS IN THE PRESENT CASE

12
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

FACTS –

Prahul is a poor man who lives in the village of Pirampur in the state of Navnirman. He is
married to Subra and has two children out of wedlock. The state of Navnirman doesn’t have
proper infrastructure, and there is rampant corruption in Navnirman, hence, there are hardly
any jobs in the state of Navnirman. To eke out a living and provide proper education to his
children, Prahul migrated with his family to the state of Rajia, where numerous industries are
located. He got employed in the MS. Hanuman Sponge Iron Industry, whose sole proprietor
was Mr. Bansak Seth. Prahul was engaged for rupees 8,000 per month, and he had to work 11
hours a day. Bansak Seth was very rude to his employees and often got annoyed with them.
Owing to this attitude, no labourer worked for him for more than 6 months. Prahul was a hard
worker who always completed his tasks on time. He used to work beyond his work hours.
Even Bansak Seth liked his work, but since September 2022, Prahul has not been able to
work with concentration due to the death of his youngest daughter Reema due to COVID. To
cope with this, Prahul started drinking and quarrelling with his co-workers at M/S Hanuman
Sponge Iron Industries.
On 9th October 2022 Prahul being in an inebriated condition, started quarrelling with his co-
labourer seeing this tussle Bansak Seth arrives at the scene and scolds all the labourers,
including Prahul and warns them that they would be fired from their jobs if they kept
quarrelling like that. Prahul felt very sad after this, and he left for home immediately that day,
i.e., on the 9th of October. He didn’t come to work on 10th October. On 11th October, his
wife persuaded him to go to work. He went but didn’t do his work properly. Bansak Seth
wasn’t available on M/S Hanuman Iron Sponge Industries that day. After completing his
work, Prahul bought some pesticides from a fertilizer shop. After that, he went home. After
his wife and eldest daughter went to sleep, he consumed the pesticides and slept alone. On
12th October, around 5 am when Subra went to wake up Prahul, he didn’t respond. The
doctor later declared him dead. A fir was registered under section 174 of the CrPC with the
number 108 of 2022, and an investigation was launched. The police shifted Prahul’s body to
the government hospital for post-mortem. In the post-mortem report, it was revealed that
Prahul committed suicide.
The police took statements of Subra and Darnh in which Subra stated that Prahul was unable
to digest the death of their daughter and he wasn’t working properly. Darnh confirmed the
same, telling police that Prahul arrived at work inebriated and fought with him and another
13
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

co-worker, for which Bansak Seth chastised them. Based on these initial statements, the
police charged Bansak Seth under Section 306 I.P.C., after which the police reprimanded
Bansak Seth and again took the statement of Subra; this time Subra changed the version of
her statement and stated that Bansak Seth used to reprimand her husband and used to not pay
wages on time. Darnh reiterated his initial statement. Another co-worker named Granny said
that when Prahul fought with his co-workers, Bansak Seth scolded him so badly that Prahul
couldn’t work with concentration. A Chargesheet was filed being C.C no. 1561 of 2022 on
19th November 2022 against Bansak Seth for offences under Section 306 of I.P.C. the police
sent the documents and charge-sheet to the Metropolitan Magistrate, Nar-Haripur for taking
cognizance and conduct trial against Bansak Seth. Bansak Seth filed quash petition bearing
CRLP No. 9803 of 2022 in the High Court of Rajia under Section 452 of CrPC.
After hearing the council of Bansask Seth, the Public Prosecutor representing the state and
de-facto complainant i.e.., Subra, the High Court of Rajia vide order dated 5th January 2023
quashed the criminal proceedings against Bansak Seth under the grounds-
1. An offence under Section 306 isn’t attracted.
2. De-facto complainant gave two versions of the case.
3. Prahul committed Suicide after 2 days after the incident.

After the judgment of the High Court, neither the state of Rajia nor the de-facto complainant
went for an appeal to the Supreme court of Indiania. Helping Indiania, helping NGO after
taking legal advice from its legal team filed a Special Leave Petition bearing number 13789
of 2023 in the Supreme Court of Indiania contending that –
1. H.C. erred in observing that the ingredients of Section 306 aren’t attractive.
2. The difference in the version of the de-facto complainant isn’t a ground for quash.
3. The allegation against Bansak Seth is a subject matter of trial.

14
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. ISSUE – I

WHETHER THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS

HON’BLE SUPREME COURT?

2. ISSUE – II

HOW CAN NGO WHICH IS NEITHER A VICTIM NOR A DEFACTO COMPLAINIANT

FILE A SLP?

3. ISSUE – III

ASSUMING SLP TO BE MAINTAINABLE WHETHER PROCEEDINGS ARE LIABLE

TO BE QUASHED AGAINST BANSAK SETH?

15
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE I

WHETHER THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS

HONAABLE SUPREME COURT??

The special leave petition is not maintainable as the SLP was filed just to waste the courts
time and the acquittal of Bansak Seth by the HC of Rajia was correct. The SLP shouldn’t be
allowed to be entertained as it is filed by a third party, and there are no grounds on which the
SLP is filed. The grounds for filing the SLP are absurd and are just a waste of courts precious
time.

ISSUE II

CAN AN NGO WHICH IS NEITHER A VICTIM NOR A DE-FACTO COMPLAININT

FILE AN SLP??

The NGO cannot file an appeal because it was neither a victim nor a complainant and the
NGO is a stranger to the case. The appeal to the supreme court must be made by either the
complainant or the State but since neither of them complained or appealed about it in the
supreme court therefore it can be assumed that they were satisfied with the decision of high
court in which the high court quashed the FIR. The NGO has no LOCUS STANDI in the case
and has No whatsoever relation with the case. Therefore, the NGO should not be allowed to
file an SLP and the SLP shouldn’t be maintainable.

ISSUE III

ASSUMING SLP TO BE MANTAINABLE WHETHER PROCEDDINGS ARE LIABLE

TO BE QUASHED AGAINST BANSAK SETH?

Even if it is assumed that the SLP is maintainable still the proceedings against Bansak Seth
are liable to be quashed as the high court gave the right judgement and didn’t err in its
judgement. There was prima facie no evidence that Bansak Seth was even liable for the

16
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

abetment of suicide of Prahul. There was different version of statement given by the
complaint to the Police which shows that complaint changed her story to gain monetary
benefits from Bansak Seth and to frame him for abetment of suicide. There wasn’t even a
case against him, the chargesheet was filed just for name’s sake without enough evidence to
even conduct a trail against Bansak Seth.

17
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE – I

WHETHER THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THIS

HON’BLE SUPREME COURT?

The Petition for Special Leave is not maintainable.

Article 136 does not confer a Right of Appeal, but merely, a discretionary power to the
Supreme Court to be exercised for satisfying the demands of justice under exceptional
circumstances 1. In Pritam Singh v. The State2, the Supreme Court held that the power under
Article 136 is to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases only. In concluding the
discussion on Article 136 in the same case, it was held the by the Supreme Court that ‘, this
court will not grant Special Leave, unless it is shown that exceptional and special
circumstances exist, that substantial and grave injustice has been done and that the case in
question presents features of sufficient gravity to warrant a review of the decision appealed
against.’

Although the power has been held to be plenary, limitless3, adjunctive, and unassailable4, in
M. C. Mehta v. Union of India5 and Aero Traders Private Limited v. Ravinder Kumar
Suri6, it was held that the powers under Article 136 should be exercised with caution and in
accordance with law and set legal principles.

In the cases of Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi7 and Shivanand Gaurishankar

Baswanti v. Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills 8, the Supreme Court has criticized the approach of
settling private disputes under Article 136, stating that it would lead to confusing results and

1
N. Suriyakala v. A. Mohandoss, (2007) 9 SCC 196
2
AIR 1950 SC 169: 1950 SCR 453
3
A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 2007 SC 1546
4
Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2004 SC 3467
5
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 4618
6
Aero Traders Private Limited v. Ravider Kumar Suri, AIR 2005 SC 15
7
Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi, AIR 2006 SC 1806
8
Shivanand Gaurishankar Baswanti v. Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills, (2008) 13 SCC 323
9
Mathai Joby v. George, (2010) 4 SCC 358
18
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

lack of precedents. The Court observed that the Court is not bound to interfere even if there
is error of law in the impugned order9.

It is humbly submitted to this Hon’ble Court that there was no error in the judgement of the
Bombay High Court; the contract between the Appellants and the Respondents provided
Delhi as the place of suing, and the Bombay High Court has observed the same in while
dismissing the matter. The counsel for the Respondents would also like to submit to this.
Hon’ble Court that there is no pressing matter or question of law, for which, the intervention
of this Court would be necessary, i.e., there is no necessity to invoke the jurisdiction
conferred upon this Hon’ble Court under Article 136.

Scope of Powers under Article 136:

It is humbly submitted that if Special Leave is granted, the matter is registered as an appeal
and the Court does not take into cognizance all the points that may arise on appeal and decide
them on Merits9. The Supreme Court has also held that “it is not bound to go into merits and
even if we do so and declare the law or point the error – still we may not interfere if the
justice of the case on facts does not require interference or if we feel that the relief could be
moulded in a different fashion.”10

The Supreme Court in Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala11 held that Article 136 consists of
two distinct stages, the first stage where the matter is merely being decided if it is to be
accepted as an appeal or not; if the Supreme Court decides to adjudicate the matter, it
becomes an appeal, if otherwise, the matter was never an appeal.

Hence, it is humbly submitted to this Hon’ble Court that by reason of lack of any specific
matter that requires the intervention of this Hon’ble Court, the Court need not entertain the
matter; however, if this Hon’ble Court does decide to accept the Petition for Special Leave, it
is humbly submitted that this Hon’ble Court only adjudicate upon the order of the Bombay
High Court, i.e., not to hear this Appeal on merits, but merely, on the right place of suing.

9
Taherkhatoon v. Sala,bin Mohammam, AIR 1999 SC 1104
10
Taherkhatoon v. Sala,bin Mohammam, AIR 1999 SC 1104
11
Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala, (2000) 245 ITR 360 (SC)
19
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

Grounds on which appeal are granted not satisfied:

The Supreme Court has exercised its Jurisdiction under Article 136 under the following
circumstances-

(i) When the Tribunal ostensibly fails to exercise its patent jurisdiction. 12

(ii) When there is an apparent error on the face of the decision13.

(iii) The tribunal has erroneously applied well-accepted principles of jurisprudence 14

iv) The tribunal acts against the principles of Natural Justice 15, or has approached the
question in a manner likely to cause injustice 16

In the instant case, the Rajia High Court has not committed any error in law. The High Court
has seen that there wasn’t enough evidence against Bansak Seth and Prima Facie it looked as
he was innocent and the charges against him were just done to gain monetary advantages.
There is no breach in law or natural justice; to say the decision of the Rajia High Court was
wrong because the matter has been adjudicated on merits whatsoever. Hence, it is humbly
submitted to this Hon’ble Court that no grounds can be made out for accepting this petition
for Special Leave. Therefore, this SLP shouldn't be allowed to be entertained by this
honourable court.

12
Chief Administrator cum Jt. Secretary, Government of India v. D. C. Dass, AIR 1999 SC 186
13
Siemens Eng and Mfg Co. v. Union of India, AIR 1976 SC 1785
14
Clerks of Calcutta Tramways v. Calcutta Tramways Co. Ltd., AIR 1957 SC 78
15
City Corner v. P.A. to the Collector, AIR 1976 SC 143
16
Mohan Lal v. Management, Bharat Electronics Ltd., AIR 1981 SC 1253
20
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

ISSUE II

CAN AN NGO WHICH IS NEITHER A VICTIM NOR A DE FACTO

COMPLAININT FILE A SLP?

Special Leave Petition is filed before the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution
with a prayer that permission/leave to appeal before it be granted as there is a substantial
question of law of public or general importance in the matter. Granting permission/ leave to
appeal before the Court is an extraordinary discretionary power of the court and in my
opinion, leave is granted where the court feels that:

1. substantial question of law of public or general importance are involved in the matter.
2. court feels that sufficient justice has not been done to the parties.
3. justice may have been done but the reasoning is not well founded.
4. ends of justice demand interference from the supreme court.
5. complete justice is required to be done.

The NGO cannot file an SLP as it has no locus standi in the current case. It is neither the
victim nor the de facto complainant and it has no reason to file an SLP before this honourable
court. The SLP filed is of frivolous nature and is filed only to damage the reputation the
reputation of Mr. Bansak Seth. In the current case there is no question of substantial law as it
was a case of suicide and no direct involvement of Bansak Seth was found. Even though
there was a charge sheet filed but still there was no prima facie evidence that he was guilty. In
this case there was no injustice done because since there was no prima facie evidence
therefore the high court of Rajia acquitted him. There are several case laws in which supreme
court has set up a precedent that the third party cannot file a SLP unless and until they have a
LOCUS STANDI in the case.

SLP is maintainable only while there is a question of substantial law at stake or where many
people have been wrong. There was no gross injustice in this case so there was no reason for
the NGO to file an appeal. This SLP can’t be allowed to be entertained. This SLP is a
frivolous attempt to damage the reputation of Bansak Seth. The filing of this SLP is just a
way for the Plaintiff to gain money from Bansak Seth.

21
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

The intervention of third parties clearly cited in "Rajubhai Dhamirbhai Baria v. State of
Gujarat" 17 . It iterated the settled position of third parties having no locus standi for
intervention in the criminal Proceedings. The Code of Criminal Procedure also makes it clear
that Strangers have no right to appear before the court.

Subsequently the judgment given in "Subramanian Swamy v. Raju" 18 stands on the same
principle which was given in Rajubhai Dhamirbhai Baria v. State of Gujrat 19.

In Arunachalam v. P.S.R. SADHANANTHAM and ANR.20, this Court has considered the
competence of a private party, as distinguished from the State to invoke the jurisdiction of
this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution against a judgment of acquittal by the High
Court. It was held that appellate power vested in the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the
Constitution is not to be confused with ordinary appellate power exercised by appellate courts
and appellate tribunals under specific statutes. Article 136 of the Constitution vests the
Supreme Court with a plenitude of plenary, appellate power over all Courts and Tribunals in
India. The power is plenary in the sense that there are no words in Article 136 itself
qualifying that power. But the very nature of the power has led the Court to set limits to itself
within which it has to exercise such power. The power is vested in the Supreme Court but the
right to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction is vested in no one. The exercise of the power of the
Supreme Court is not circumscribed by any limitation as to who may invoke it. The Court
found that the judgment of acquittal by the High Court has led to serious miscarriage of
justice. Therefore, it was held that Supreme Court cannot refrain from doing its duty and
abstain from interfering on the ground that a private party and not the State has invoked the
Court’s jurisdiction.

After the HC gave it judgement neither Subra nor State filed an appeal. The NGO who has no
locus standi filed an SLP just to waste the precious time of SC and to gain monetary gains
from Bansak Seth. This whole case was filed just due to a product of mala-fide intention,
falsehood, and absurdity.

17
2004 CriLJ 771: (2004) 1 GLR 404
18
(2014) 8 SCC 390
19
2004 CriLJ 771, (2004) 1GLR 404
20
(1979) 2 SCC 297
22
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

ISSUE III

ASSUMING SLP TO BE MAINTAINABLE WHETHER PROCEEDINGS ARE

LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AGAINST BANSAK SETH?

Assuming the SLP to be maintainable still the proceedings are liable to be quashed against
Bansak Seth.

In George Pentaiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 21 it was declared that while allowing the
appeal and quashing the complaint in the Apex Court held that while exercising the inherent
power. The HC must have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC.

In the case of Sheo Nath Singh vs. Sujata; SC decided that even though a chargesheet was
filed, still the F.I.R can be quashed when there is abuse of law or there is prima facie evidence
that he was innocent.

In the case of R.P Kapur vs. State of Punjab 22, in its judgement held that criminal
proceedings against a person can be quashed if the case is being dealt with –

i. Where the allegation in the F.I.R don’t constitute an offence, even it taken as face
value and in entirely?
ii. Where the allegation made constitute an offence, but there is no evidence to prove
them?

Similar things happened in the case of Mr. Bansak Seth, as there was no proof and prima
facie, there was no evidence to constitute a crime.

In Abhishek Gupta and Another’s vs. NCT of Delhi and Another’s23, it was held by Delhi HC
that F.I.R and chargesheet can be quashed if the allegation made in F.I.R or complainant or
the evidence collected doesn’t disclosed the commission of an offence.

Justice Asha Menon was of the view that the decision of court to exercise the inherent power
under Section 482 of CrPC would be predicted on the facts of each case and according to

21
2009 (1) SCC 446
22
1960 A.I.R 1862, SC
23
CRL. M.C. 1064/2022
23
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

facts of this case, the F.I.R quashed is correct and this SLP holds no ground to be
maintainable or whatsoever.

In the case of Prabhat Bhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat 24, SC laid down some principles
regarding the inherent power of HC under Section 482 of CrPC.

These points are –

i. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse
of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not
confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the
High Court.
ii. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information
Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived
at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of
jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an
offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is
attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable.
iii. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be
quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must
evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent
power.
iv. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it
must be exercised.
a. to secure the ends of justice or
b. to prevent an abuse of the process of any court.
v. The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be
quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute,
revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive
elaboration of principles can be formulated.
vi. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that
the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature

24 Criminal appeal no. 1723 of 2017

24
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental
depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be
quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute.
Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact
upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on
the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences.
vii. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have
an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a
distinct footing in so far as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is
concerned.
viii. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial,
mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour
may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the
dispute.
ix. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the
compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote, and
the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice;
and
x. There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix)
above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the
state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between
private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where
the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or
misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or
economic system will weigh in the balance.”

The Honourable High court of Rajia Quashed the criminal proceedings against Bansak Seth
on the grounds that: -

i) Offence under 306 of IPC are not attracted in this case:

The offence of section 306 of Indian Penal Code is Abetment of suicide. The ingredients of
section 306 of IPC are not attracted in this case as intention is one of the ingredients and

25
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

Bansak seth had no intention of ever abetting one of his own workers to suicide. There was a
suicide but there wasn’t any intention of Bansak Seth to abet Prahul to commit suicide. It can
be clearly stated that from the fact that the death of Prahul’s daughter had a huge impact on
life and after the death of his daughter, he started drinking and became violent and this had
nothing to do with Bansak Seth or the scoldings which he gave to Prahul for quarrelling in his
factory. The death of his daughter had affected him so severely that he became depressed.
Even on 11th October, he didn’t do his properly as he is unable to digest his daughter’s death
which ultimately led to his suicide. On 11th October, Bansak Seth wasn’t even at m/s
hanuman sponge iron industry. So, even if he wanted to, he couldn’t have abetted the suicide
of Prahul.

In CBI vs Ravi Shankar Srivastava25, the allegation made in F. I.R the evidence collected in
support of same don’t disclose commission of any offence or make a case against the accused
then the F. I. R can be quashed.

The quashing of criminal proceedings against Mr Bansak Seth was right by the High Court
of Rajia as the ingredients of Abetment of Suicide is not applicable in this case. Quashing of
FIR by HC was correct because as per section 482 of CrPC. The charges against Mr. Bansak
Seth was an abuse of law, as there was prima facie no evidence that he was guilty.

ii) De-facto complainant gave two version about the case.

Subra who was the de-facto complainant and wife of Prahul gave two version of incidents
which happened in the case. In her initials statement Subra stated that Prahul was unable to
digest the death of their younger daughter Reema, hence he was not working properly and
that he used to quarrel with her at home and with co-workers at work.

After Bansak Seth was arrested and a charge sheet was filed against him, Subra Changed her
statement and in her later statement she stated that Bansak Seth used to reprimand her
husband and used to not pay wages on time.

The change of Subra’s statement showed that there was some malicious intention for
accusing Bansak Seth as she wanted money for the care of herself and her daughter. Subra’s
second statement is false as it can be inferred from the facts of the case that Bansak Seth was
very happy with Prahul’s work and even Prahul was happy working for him. Prahul even

25
(2006) 7 SCC 188 :(2006) 3 SCC Cri 233
26
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

completed all the task assigned to him in time. Thus, Subra was lying in her second version
of police statement to get money from Bansak Seth.

Even Darnh one of the co-workers of Prahul in his statement on record with the police has
stated that on the day that Bansak Seth scolded Prahul, Prahul came to work in inebriated
condition and fought with him and other workers over which Bansak Seth scolded them.

iii) Prahul committed suicide two days after the incident.

The third ground for quashing of FIR by the honourable high court of Rajia was that Prahul
committed suicide two days after Bansak Seth scolded him. Death of Prahul happened 2 days
after the incident, therefore liable as he not only scolded Prahul but other employees too.
Bansak Seth scolded the labourers only because they’re quarrelling during work hours. If
Prahul was affected by the scolding of Bansak Seth, why would he come to work on 11th
October. Therefore, the death of Prahul had nothing to do with Bansak Seth as he died two
days after he was scolded.

The SLP filed is of frivolous nature and is filed only to damage the reputation the reputation
of Mr. Bansak Seth. In the current case there is no question of substantial law as it was a case
of suicide and no direct involvement of Bansak Seth was found. This SLP is a frivolous
attempt to damage the reputation of Bansak Seth. The filing of this SLP is just a way for the
Plaintiff to gain money from Bansak Seth.

27
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT
 FRONTIERS WELFARE SOCIETY
2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

PRAYER

Therefore, it is prayed, considering the issues raised, arguments advanced, and authorities
cited, that this Hon'ble Supreme Court may be pleased to hold that:

1. the Special Leave Petition is not maintainable.

2. the Hon’ble High Court of Rajia didn’t err in quashing the criminal proceedings
against the Bansak Seth.
3. And pass any other Order, Direction, or Relief that it may deem fit in the Best
Interests of Justice, Fairness, Equity and Good Conscience. All of which is
respectfully submitted.

Place: S/d_________________

Date: (Counsel on behalf of the respondent)

28
MEMORIAL ON THE BEHALF OF RESPONDENT