Memorial For The Side of Respondent-1

AGNELChhatrapati

SCHOOL OF ShriLAW,
Shivaji2ndNATIONAL MOOT
Maharaj Fourth State COURT
Level MootCOMPETETION-2024
Court Competition,2023

AGNEL SCHOOL OF LAW 2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2023

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF

INDUS
IN THE MATTER OF:
X................................................................................................................................ Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF GONDA ............................................................................................ Respondent
MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITED

ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
Writtensubmission
Written submissionon
onbehalf
behalfofofRespondent
Respondent Page 1
AGNEL SCHOOL OF LAW, 2ndNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETETION-2024
Table of Contents
1. LIST OF ABBRIVATION ...............................................................................................
2. INDEX OF AUTHORITRIES .........................................................................................

I. Cases ………………………………………………..
II. Legislation ………………………………………….
III. Books ……………………………………………….
IV. Online Database ……………………………………
3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...............................................................................
4. STATEMENT OF FACTS ................................................................................................
5. ISSUE RAISED .................................................................................................................
6. SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS ........................................................................................
7. ARGUMENT ADVANCED ...............................................................................................
I. Whether the petition filed by one of the victims in Writ Petition (Crl.) is
maintainable?
II. Whether the writ petitions filed as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) assailing
the impugned orders of remission dated 29.02.2022 are maintainable?
III. Whether the state of Gonda has power to remit the punishment of the
accused, when their trial took place in the jurisdiction of Khelrashtra?
Written submission on behalf of Respondent

IV.. Whether remission policy of constitution of Indus permits to punishment in

such kind of crime/offences?
V. Whether victim has right to challenge the decision of the appropriate

Government in view power exercise in policy decision which is enshrined by
the constitution?
8. PRAYER …………………………………………………………………………

Index of Abbreviations
Art Article
Cri Criminal
Vs Verses
Crpc Code of criminal procedure
Ss Subsection
u/s Under Section
IPC Indian Penal Code
SC Supreme Court
SCC Supreme Court Cases
A.I.R All India Reporter
Sec. Section
Ors. Others
Hon’ble Honorable.
HC High Court

Index of Authorities
I. Constitution Of India,1949
II. Statutes:
1. The Prisons Act,1894

2. Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
4. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
III. Books:
1. Textbook on Indian Penal Code, Seventh Edition, KD Gaur.

2. Textbook on The Law of Evidence, Twenty Third Edition, Dr. Surendra SahaiShrivastava.
3. Text book on Criminal Producer Code 5th edition R.V. Kelkars
4. Text book on Constitutional Law by M.P. Jain
5. Text book on Indian Polity By M Laxmikant
IV. Essays, Articles, Journals and websites:

1. Live law – Basic Principle of Law.
2. https://www.studocu.com
3. https://www.lawctopus.com
4. http://indiankanoon.org

5. Manupatra

V. Judicial Decisions Referred
Sr. No. Cases
1 Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India (1984
2 Union Of India vs V. Sriharan @ ,Murugan & Ors
3 Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde And Another v. State Of Maharashtra
4 Satish v. State of U.P. and Anr, 2021
5 Mohommad Giasuddin v State of A.P.(1997)
6 State of harayana v mahendra singh (2007)
7 Mohd. Hanif Quareshi vs. State of Bihar (1958
10
11
12
13
14
15

Statement of Jurisdiction
Article 32 in Constitution of India,

Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part.
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the
rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in
the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warrant and certiorari, whichever may
be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.

Statement of Facts
1) Background:-
Indus is a democratic republic country with 29 states having seperation of powers. State of
Gonda is one of the state among them. State of Gonda have a place name ponda in ponda
there were incident of train burning which is followed by riots in state of Gonda. In this
unfortunately riots on dated 02-02-2002 convicts were found guilty of heinous crimes such as
gang rape , murder of family members of victim including Eight minors.
2) Crime scene:-
There was large scale riots in state of Gonda on 02-02-2002 .The predators committed heinous
crimes like gang rape and murder of family members of petitioner. Accused committed gang
rape on petitioner also. Petitioner also gang raped mother of petitioner and murdered.
Accused also gang raped cousin of petitioner who just delivered a baby and murdered. Eight
minors along with only two days old infant also murdered by accused. Petitioner daughter
murdered by smashing her head. Two minor brothers and two minor sisters are also
murdered by accused. All other members of family who were uncle, aunt, and maternal uncle
and three cousins of petitioner were also murdered.
3) Trial of the case:-

Although place of offence is state of Gonda but for safety of witnesses and for fair trial it is
transferred from state of Gonda to state of khelrashtra. The said trial was concluded by life
imprisonment to said accused for committing heinous crime. Aftermath the appeal preferred
by state of khelrashtra and accused rejected by honorable High court of khelrashtra and
confirmed their conviction. The said appeal then travelled to Indus Apex court and Apex
court conferred decision of High court.
4) Decision of the case:-

Both Honorable High court of state of khelrashtra and honorable Apex court of Indus
conferred life imprisonment of accused.
5) Application for Remission:-

Accused filed application for remission before state of Gonda after the completion of
sufficient amount of punishment.
6) Remission policy:-
Constitution of Indus believes in reformative policy and provides authority to state
Government to remit accused if they are curable on basis of Education. Constitution permit
remission of accused if they are curable and setting them free will lessen the burden on state.
7) Remission order:-
State of Gonda granted remission by order bearing No 2522/2022 dated 29-02-2022 to all
convicts and released them on the grounds that they are improved and offence was committed
in territory of Gonda.
8) Writ petition by petitioner for quashing order of Remission:-

Petitioner filed writ petition before apex court assailing order dated 29.02.2022 against order
of state of Gonda which permitted pre mature release of the accused.

Statement of Issues
ISSUE 1
1. Whether the petition filed by one of the victims in Writ Petition (Crl.) is maintainable?
ISSUE 2
2. Whether the writ petitions filed as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) assailing the
impugned orders of remission dated 29.02.2022 are maintainable?
ISSUE 3
3. Whether the state of Gonda has power to remit the punishment of the accused, when their
trial took place in the jurisdiction of Khelrashtra?
ISSUE 4
4. Whether remission policy of constitution of Indus permits to r punishment in such kind of
crime/offences?
ISSUE 5
5. Whether victim has right to challenge the decision of the appropriate Government in view
power exercise in policy decision which is enshrined by the constitution?

Summary of Arguments
1) Whether the petition filed by one the victim in Writ Petition (crt) is maintainable?
No, it is not maintainable. Filed under the article 32 is mainly for remedy against
violation of fundamental rights. It is not remedy against remission order which is
passed by state govt.
2) Whether the writ petition filed as PIL assailing the impugned orders of remission dated 29
Feb 2022 are maintainable?
No, writ petition filed as PIL is not maintainable. As PIL is mainly for the spirited citizen to
whom legal remedy is not available and if there is public interest. Here is personal interest of
petition and not public interest.
3) Whether state of Gonda have power to remit the punishment of accused when the trial took
place in the jurisdiction of state khelrashtra?
Yes, State of Gonda have power to remit the accuse as case was transferred to Khelrashtra for
fair trial and as constitution of Indus believes in reformative policy. Reformation is done is
jail and jail is subject of State as per 7Th schedule of constitution.
4) Whether Remission Policy of Constitution permits to remit the punishment in such crime of
crimes?
Yes, as a democratic country having Separation of powers. State govt has all rights to remit
accused under Art 161 of the Constitution. This power reserved to Governor as executive
head of state.

5)Whether victim has right to challenge the decision of the appropriate govt In view power
exercise in policy decision which is enshrined by constitution?
No, victim does not have right to challenge the decision of appropriate govt which is
enshrined in Art 161 of Constitution. The decision is merely between accused and state and
such challenge will lead to interfere in power state and if such challenge is accepted by apex
court, it will floodgate for other cases and results in increased burden on supreme court.

Arguments Advance
1) Whether the petition filed by one of the victims in writ petition (CRL) is
maintainable?
The writ petition (CRL) 2022 filed by victim of order dated 20.12.22 is not
maintainable the Indus constitution is unique in it's content and spirit. The
constitution is the rule book for a state.it states out fundamental principles or
established president by which state is govern. Article 32 and Article 226 of the
constitution provide the right to constitutional remedies. This article is fundamental
right and guarantees equality in every aspect. The constitution is the supreme law of
land for every Indus citizen. A writ petition is a formal request made to a Court for the
enforcement of constitution right.
As rightly said by Dr. B.R.Ambedkar article 32 heart and soul of
the constitution this article included the fundamental structure regulation directly
approaching the supreme court for challenging order of remission would increase
burden on the court by straightaway filing petition before the supreme court where an
alternative remedy under article 226 which is wider or choose scope is wider than
article 32 is available to victim. The victim was having the right to first approach the
state court, instead the victim directly approach the SC which will increase the burden
on the SC.
So the petition filed by petitioner (CRL) must be dismissed reserving liberty to her to
approach the HC under article 226.

If this writ petition is maintainable here then every victim approaches the apex court
of Indus. Under article 32 which will lower down the prestige of the state court and
affect the judicial capacity of HC. This will result in challenging comperencny of the
high court for serving justice for democratic nation.
As the crime was committed in the state of Gonda on 23.02.2002 and all the
accused persons were found guilty of committing heinous crime during the large -scale
riots in Gonda state. The said trial was concluded with the conviction of the all accused
persons and awarded life imprisonment to all the predators, now where the matter of
remission and this petition is nowhere related to conviction of the accused.so the
accused have every possible right for remission.
Further, Indus is having its own written constitution which means it is very
comprehensive, elaborate and detailed document written constitution with a set of
fundamental, legal, political rule that are binding on every citizen.
Indus has all the civil as well as criminal laws which are codified and in
uniformity of the judicial work there are procedural laws That are in force for the
criminal proceeding. There is a criminal procedure code. The code of criminal
procedure 1973 was the main legislation on procedure for administration of substaive
criminal laws in India.
Under sec.432 CRPC provides for the power to suspend or remit
sentences Indus upholds the rule of law which means that all laws apply equally to all
citizens of the country and no one is above on the law. Every citizen of the country has
right to approach the courts in case the laws are violated.
It was held that Article 226 has a much broader scope than Article 32, as it gives the
High Courts the power to issue orders, directions, and writs not only for the
enforcement of fundamental rights but also for the enforcement of legal rights that are
granted to the disadvantaged by statute and are just as important as the fundamental
rights.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India (1984

Rule of law implies that the creation of laws, their enforcement, and relationship
among legal rules are themselves legally regulated so that no one including most highly
placed official is above the law.
And as the Indus upholds the rule of law, the rule of law not only intact
such basic requirements about how the law should be enacted in society, it also implies
certain qualities about the characteristics and content of the laws themselves.
In Indus country's constitution president as well as governor plays very vital role
president is the head of the state. While the governor is chief executive of the state.
President of India acts as a symbol of unity integrity and the solitary of the nation.
Indus country's constitution gives power to the president as well as the governor and
their respective office to remit after and commute the punishment which are awarded
by judiciary. As remission is matter between convict and the state. The state have the
power to remit the sentence which is given under article 161 of the Indus
constitution.Ssimilarly the center government also have the power to remit sentence
under article 72 of the constitution.the power of remission is vested under the judicial
power of the president and the governor.
If the right of remission is not allowed to the accused then it violates article 21 of
constitution.
State of Tamil Nadu would, however, contend that the Writ Petition does not reflect
any violation of fundamental right for invoking Article 32 , that ... fall under the
category of Constitutional question and, therefore, the Writ Petition was not
maintainable. The learned Senior Counsel by referring to the correspondence
exchanged
Union Of India vs V. Sriharan @ ,Murugan & Ors

Indus is the democratic country,federal, republic that upholds the separation of powers the
doctrine of separation is the distribution of various functions among the legislative, executive
and judicial branches of the government legislature, executive and judiciary.the purpose of
separation is to limit the possibility of arbitrary excess by the government separation of power
also prevents misuse of power or accumulation of power in a few hands which thereby
safeguards the society from arbitrary and additional power of state.
A writ petition was filed under Article 32 in this Court challenging the
validity of the order of the High Court ...judicial order of the court. This Court by seven
Judges per majority held that the petitioners had no fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a).
The court had inherent power and jurisdiction under Section 151 CPC to conduct ...way of a
writ petition under Article 226. The High Court held that the writ petition was not
maintainable.
As Indus is a democratic, republic, having separation of power every accused have right
to remission mentioned under article 72 and 161 of the constitution. As,also mentioned in the
facts state of Gonda have power to remit the sentence.
The said crime was transferred from state of Gonda to khelrashtra for the
victims safety and fair trial.but if the place of occurrence and the place of residence are
considered then they are in the state of Gonda.
When the state of Gonda by way of bearing order no.2522/2022 dated
29.02.2022 granted remission to all the convicted accused and released then from pre-
mature life imprisonment then that decision Gonda state court was objected by the
victim on unnecessary grounds which can result in gave injustice to the accused.
Maintaining writ petition can led to increased controversy
between apex authority and state authority as mentioning writ petition will question
performance of the state authority.
Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde And Another v. State Of Maharashtra

ISSUE:2
Whether the writ petition files as PIL maintainable or not ?
N0 the writ petition file as PIL is not maintainable.
Because the Definition of the PIL clearly states that the, PIL mean Public Interest Litigation
means the petition which must be contain the issue which have contain the public interest.
Definition of PIL as given in M. Laxmikant.
A petition in which any public sprited citizen or social organisation can move the court for the
enforcement of the rights of any person or group of persons who because of there poverty or
ignorance or socially or economically disadvantaged position are themselves unable to approach the
court for the remedies. Thus in a PIL any member of public having sufficient interest can approach
the court for enforcement the rights of other persons and redressal of the common grievance
Definition of PIL as given in Supreme Court decision.
The supreme court has defined the PIL as a legal action initiated in a court of law for the
enforcement of public interest or general interest in which in the public or a class of the community
have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights or liabilities are affected
Thus this writ petition which was filed as PIL does not fulfill any criteria given in above
definitions of Jurist, authors, books, & S.C. Judgements
B. Social Impact
The PIL is the backbone of the Social Justice which has very much importance in the
society. The Public Interest Litigation was introduce to reduce the principle of Locus Standi,
to give an opportunity to the people or social organization to file a suit against the
wrongdoer.
The PIL has very much importance in the society. But it such type of cases are started
filling in the Apex Court of the law then it has very bad impact on the society & on also the
peoples of the society. If the Courts started entering such type of cases as PIL, anyone can
come & filed his personal interest litigation as Public Interest Litigation.
There are also chances of the delivering bad massages in the society that any person
having personal interest can file case on public interest under the Article- 32 of the
Constitution Of The India.

C. Judicial Impact
The principal role of the Judiciary is to protect ruler of law. It Safeguards the rights of
individual, settle disputes in accordance with the law & ensures that Democracy does not
give way to individual or group dictatorship.
But in this Case the petitioner filed writ petition as a public interest litigation violating
the principles of natural justice & equality.
Due to this petition the peoples may be of opinion that the individual interest petition
can be filed as Public Interest Litigation & due to this the over burden of the cases may be
increase on the judiciary.
Nowadays in India there is over burden of the cases on the Supreme Court & High Court
& all other Subordinate Courts. & due to this writ petition indirectly impact on the Judiciary.
If the Courts started entertaining such type of petitions as PIL then it is only results in the
waste of time of the court by entertaining such type of cases.
D. Order does not violate any right of the petitioner & public but just sole matter between
convicts & state government.
The Criminals have been punished for the crime committed & now they have the right
to live with dignity in the society. It is their right to ask for remission. Nowhere in this
process the fundamental right of the petitioner violated so the claim filled by the petitioner is
completely false & bogus.
E. PIL is important for maintaining rule of law
Public Interest Litigation has wide importance for maintaining rule of law. The rule of
law states that the individuals interest cannot be file as Public Interest Litigation.
The rule of law means that all laws apply equally to all citizens of the country & no one
is above the law. Every citizen of the country has right to approach the Courts in case laws are
violated. But in this case no one right was violated due to the order of the government.
The Article-161 of the Constitution Of India clearly states that the governor of the state
has a pardoning power to give remission order to the convicts.
If such type of personal interest cases started filling in the Courts of law this is the
violation of rule of law. Because the essential conditions to file PIL does not included in this
petition.

F. Independent power of Legislature
The Indus is a federal, democratic & republic that upholds the separation of powers &
upholds the rule of law.
Meaning of a federal is the separation of power between center & state. The Democracy
of the India is based upon the three Pillars i.e Legislature, Judiciary & Executive.
The S.C. in many decisions already says that the three systems must be keep independent
& must not be interfere with one another. Thus the order given by the state government is absolute
power of the government & thus expectations are that, the judiciary does not interfere in the
decision of the state government. Because conducting of trial is the power of the state government
& the governor was the head of the state as per the provisions of the Constitution.

3 Whether the state of gonda has power to remit the punishment ,when there trial took
place in the jurisdiction of the state of khelrashtra?
:Yes, gonda state have power to remit the predators. constitution is a supreme law of
land " Supremacy of the is constitution is undisputed and cannot be challenged in a
court of Law"
The State of Gonda have power to remit predators. The Indus is The Federal,
Democratic, and Republic state That upholds the separation of powers and rule of
The predators committed crime in the Gonda state.
The matter transferred to the state of khelrashtra from the Gonda state for the trial
and after the trial have been done. Khelrashtra high court have given the life
imprisonment to all the predators. The predators prison is under Gonda state while
crime committed in the jurisdiction of Gonda.The authority of remission is under the
power of Governer.
Governer has power to remit under article 161.
The power to grant remission provided to the governor of a state under article
161 of the constitution.
The governor of a state shall have the power to grant pardon, respites or remission of
punishment to suspend remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any
offense against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the state
extends under article 161 mentioned.
The grounds of remission has given on the basis of the term 14 years of life
imprisonment completed by the predators and the state have been given the remission
predators are qurable they can improve by education and other suitable arts and then
after they could be set free again as better citizen on this ground governer have given
the remission.

State government has power to give remission order under section of crpc 432 the
provision of crpc clearly states that the government of the state has power to give
remission to convict who completed imprisonment of 14 years.
Sec.432 When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an
offence, the appropriate Government may, at any time, without conditions or upon any
conditions that the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or
remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.
Place of residence, place of offense, place of prison in state of
Gonda and hence it is convenient to the prisoners to apply for remission to the
respective state government.
The said crime occur in the state of Gonda,so the place of residence of the
crime is Gonda state only,similarly the place of offense of the crime is the state of
Gonda, so state of Gonda has power to remit the punishment of the accused.Also our
constitution of Indus is the supreme law of land and in schedule. In schedule- 7 of the
constitution of Indus it is stated that prison is a subject under state list ,so it will
become convenient to the prisoners to apply for the remission to the respective state
government.

4. Whether remission policy of constitution of Indus permits to remit the punishment

in such kind of crime/offence?
Yes , Indus is federal , democratic and republic that upholds the
seperation of powers. Seperation of powers means executive, legislative and judiciary
have different powers and remission is executive power of governor under Article 161
constitution enshrined that the Governor of state have authority to grant pardons to
any offence in all case. He has the authority to pardon, reprieve,respite,remit,suspend
or any one who has been convicted of an offence against state law.
Although he is unable to pardon death sentence or death penalty
but he has authority to suspend, remit or commute a death sentence. Remission
reduces the number of sentence without charging it's character. It remove the impact
of a conviction without addressing the defendants guilty or innocence. In a case of
remission the guilty of the offender is not affected nor is the sentence of court except in
the sense that the person concerned does not suffer incarnation for the entire period of
the sentence but it is relieved from serving out a part of it.
Remission does not mean accquital and an aggrieved
party has every right to vindicate himself or herself.Also the respondent have
completed 14 years of their terms and are eligible for remission policy before state of
Gonda.
With a reference to a judgement of this court in, it was observed in said
judgement that the power under Article 72 and 161of the constitution of India are
absolute and cannot be provision such as section 432,433 or 433A of Crpc or by any
prison rule.
1. State (government of NCT of Delhi)v Prem Raj,2003 SCC 121

According to Whether's constitutional law to cut short a sentence by an act of

clemency is an exercise of executive power which abridged the enforcement
of judgement but does not alter it qua. the judgement. Reliance is placed on Mahendar
Singh to urge that a right to be considered for remission keeping in re view the
constitutional safeguards of a convict under Article 20 and 21 or the constitution of
Indus,must be held to be a legal one.
Although no convict can be said to have any constitutional right for
obtaining remaining in his sentence but the person who come within the purview there
of are entitled to be treated equally. The length of the sentence or the gravity of the
original crime cannot be the sole basis for refusing premature release. As the policy in
Indus constitution itself says that state has power to remit the punishment and
concentrated other groups such as predators are curable,they ought to be improved by
education and other suitable arts and then after being cured they could be set free
again as a better citizen and lessen the burden of the state.
Above fact prove that constitution of Indus believe in
reshaping the accused by reformative policy. Remission is a wing of reformation
policy, which is approved only after completion of certain period in prison and after
taking into consideration behaviour, possibility of curable offender and education
which are grounds for remission.
As constitution is supreme law of land and long with victim
defendant also have some fundamental rights like Article 20and 21. As Article
20(1)says that no person shall be convicted of any offence except for violence of law in
force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subject to a
penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the
time of the commission of the offence.
2.Mahendar singh v state of Haryana

And as per the reformative policy of Indus response completed required ground
approved by authority. As Indus is democratic state Article 21 strengthen the
democratic value of state. Article 21 says that "No person shall be deprived of his life
or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.
In a significant judgement Krishna Iyer j. stated that quoted George Bernard Shaw the
femous satirist who said " If you are the punishment the man retributively, you must
injured him. If you are to reform him, you must improve him and men are not
improved by injuries.
The exercise of power of releasing a prisoner on remission must not be looked upone as
an act of charity or compassion,but as an act in the discharge of a legal duty required
to be performed upon the fulfillment of the prescribed condition, since remission is
earned by a prisoner based on her/ his good conduct in the prison.
3. Mohammad Giasuddin v.s state of A.P. 1997 SCC 287

5.Whether victim has right to challenge the decision of the appropriate Government in view
power exercise in police decision which is enshrined by the constitution?
:NO victim has not the right to challenge the decision of the appropriate Government of the
appropriate Government. The said aim of murder and gang-rape occur in the state of gonda.
The crime which happened was rarest of the rare crime and heinous in nature so for the
safety witnesses as well as for the concern of the fals trial the said crime was transferred to the
state of khelrashtra.
All the accused Persons were found guilty and were awarded life imprisonment to all
the Predators completion of sufficient time of the accused / predators, the Predators. applied
for Remission. Now, the accused were already convicted for the said crime and punished with
life imprisonment. Now here the matter is of Remission. Now the matter is not of conviction.
It is the matter of Remission. Remission is the matter between the convict and the state. No
third party Can interfere between the state and the convict.
The constitution of Indus is the supreme law of land. The
Indus constitution is a document of people's faith and aspirations possessing a special legal
sanctity constitution of Indus is the fundamental law of country and rule book of nation
which regulates the society and it's laws.
In the case of Satish v. State of U.P. and Anr, 2021, the Supreme Court
analysed, “While it is indisputably true that a community has the right to live a peaceful and
fearless life, without free-roaming criminals causing trouble in the lives of common peace-
loving people.” However, the basis of the reformative theory is equally powerful, arguing that
a decent society cannot be accomplished solely through punitive behaviours and vengefulness,
and instead, public harmony, fellowship, and consensual social acceptance should be
cultivated. As a result, first-time offenders should be given every opportunity to apologise and
look forward to a better future.
Under Article 161 of the Indus constitution governor of the state has to
power to remission.Article 161 of Indian Constitution also Indus have the civil as well as the
criminal for the criminal proceedings there is a criminal procedure code.See 432 CrPC
provide the power to suspend of remit sentence. Indus upholds the rule of law, it means every
one is equal in the eyes of laws. There is equal subjection of all persons.
As mentioned in the facts state of Gonda has
power to remit the punishment and concentrated other ground such as predators are curable
they ought to be improved by education and other suitable arts, and then after being cured
they could be set free again as a better citizen and lessen the burden on the state as remission
is a matter between the convicts and the state so at the present time victim here is the third
party or Stanger.
Satish v. State of U.P. and Anr, 2021

Victim has no right to challenge the decision of the appropriate Government as here
no fundamental rights of the victim are violated. The said crime happen all the person were
found guilty of heinous crime and punishment for life imprisonment also till this it was of a
crime nature as the victim of gang raped and her remaining family members were murdered
and gang raped. But now the matter of remission falls under the realm of administrative
decision.
Victim challenging the decision of given by the appropriate Government is a challenge
to the executive action. The matter of remission have arisen after the criminal petition have
attained finally in the eye of law.
The Supreme Court of India observed that the reformative theory of punishment is based on
the belief that human nature is capable of reform and that the object of punishment is not to
inflict retribution but to reform the offender. The court held that the ultimate aim of
punishment is to transform the offender into a useful member of society and that the
reformative approach should be given due consideration in sentencing.
The length of sentence or gravity of original crime cannot be sole basis for
refusing premature release. Any assessment regarding the predilection to commit crime upon
release must be based on antecedents as well as conduct of prisoner while in jail, and not
merely on his age or apprehension of victim and witnesses.
The accused suffered for the conseyof their action by completing
sufficient amount of punishment.Now,the right to remission is provide itself by the supreme
law that is constitution under Article 161 of constitution and in CrPC under section 432.
Every accused has the right to reformation, Plato, the Greek
Philosopher on his treatise , the laws underscore that punishment is to be inflicted not for the
sake of vengeance for what is done cannot be undone but for the sake of prevention and
reformation.
According to reformative theory the object of punishment should be to reform the
criminal, through the method of individualization. It is based on the humanistic principles
that even if an offender commits a crime he does not cease to be a human being.
So he victim do not have right to challenge to appropriate Government.
Mohd. Hanif Quareshi vs. State of Bihar (1958

Prayer
In light of issues raised arguments advanced and authorities cited may this honable Supreme
Court may be pleased to
1) To declare the order of remmission given by the state of Gonda valid
2) The petition should be rejected
It is hereby prayed any order that it deems fit in the interests of natural justice, equality and
good conscience.
Sd/-
(Humbly submitted by the counsels
Appearing on behalf of the
Respondent)


Memorial For The Side of Respondent-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Memorial For The Side of Respondent-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Memorial For The Side of Respondent-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGNELChhatrapati

AGNEL SCHOOL OF LAW 2nd NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2023

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE OF GONDA ............................................................................................ Respondent

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITED

1. LIST OF ABBRIVATION ...............................................................................................

2. INDEX OF AUTHORITRIES .........................................................................................

3. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ...............................................................................

4. STATEMENT OF FACTS ................................................................................................

5. ISSUE RAISED .................................................................................................................

6. SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS ........................................................................................

7. ARGUMENT ADVANCED ...............................................................................................

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

IV.. Whether remission policy of constitution of Indus permits to punishment in

V. Whether victim has right to challenge the decision of the appropriate

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Crpc Code of criminal procedure

u/s Under Section

IPC Indian Penal Code

SCC Supreme Court Cases

A.I.R All India Reporter

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

1. The Prisons Act,1894

1. Textbook on Indian Penal Code, Seventh Edition, KD Gaur.

IV. Essays, Articles, Journals and websites:

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

V. Judicial Decisions Referred

Sr. No. Cases

1 Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India (1984

2 Union Of India vs V. Sriharan @ ,Murugan & Ors

3 Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde And Another v. State Of Maharashtra

4 Satish v. State of U.P. and Anr, 2021

5 Mohommad Giasuddin v State of A.P.(1997)

6 State of harayana v mahendra singh (2007)

7 Mohd. Hanif Quareshi vs. State of Bihar (1958

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Article 32 in Constitution of India,

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

3) Trial of the case:-

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

5) Application for Remission:-

8) Writ petition by petitioner for quashing order of Remission:-

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India (1984

Union Of India vs V. Sriharan @ ,Murugan & Ors

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde And Another v. State Of Maharashtra

Written submission on behalf of Respondent

Whether the writ petition files as PIL maintainable or not ?

N0 the writ petition file as PIL is not maintainable.

Definition of PIL as given in M. Laxmikant.

Definition of PIL as given in Supreme Court decision.