Before

THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF SLEEPY HOLLOW

APPLICATION NO. _____/2017

Willywonka Ram and Dharmvijay……………………Petitionary

v.

State…………………………………………………Respondent
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents....................................................................................................................II
Index of Abbreviations..........................................................................................................III
Index of Authorities...............................................................................................................IV
Statement of Jurisdiction...................................................................................................VIII
Statement of Facts..................................................................................................................IX
Issues raised.........................................................................................................................XIII
Summary of arguments………………………………………………………………….XIV
Argument advanced.................................................................................................................1

The appeal filed by Willywonka Ram and Dharmvijay under section 302 of IPC is
maintainable ………………………………………………………………….... 1

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 3
 INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 4
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 5
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE COUNSELS REPRESENTING THE PETITIONER HAVE ENDORSED THEIR

PLEADINGS BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF SLEEPY HOLLOW , UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 302 OF INDICA PENAL CODE SUBJECT TO
THE ADJUDICATION OF THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED IN TERMS OF
OBJECTIONS QUA MAINTAINABILITY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONER

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 6
SECTION 302
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code. 302.
Punishment for murder.—Whoever commits murder
shall be punished with death, or 1[imprisonment for life],
and shall also be liable to fine.

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 7
 STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Dabanga and Mastana is a village situated in Sleepy Hollow .It is situated in the
western part of Indica .
2. On 1.5.2016 at 1.00 AM a call was received in Dabanga police station that two dead
bodies were found on the berm of the bypass of dabanga . They were appeared to
have been put to death by first smashing their heads with heavy stones and finally by
slitting their throats.
3. Two bodies were identified as one of male and other of female .Villagers identified
male as Ranjha Patel (22 years) of Mastana village and female as Heer Ben (19
years) of Dabanga village
4. Further examination of body revealed some other injuries on various parts of the body

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 8
 5. After all these examination a F.I.R no. 10 dated 1.5.2016 at P.S. Dabanga u/s 302
Indica Penal Code
6. Post-mortem report revealed that the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage , on
account of multiple injuries . It confirmed that both has been murdered by use of
heavy stomes and sharp edged weapon and before murder they were beaten brutally
as many injuries were found on various parts of their body.
7. Forensic report revealed human blood of three persons A+ relating to boy , B+
relating to Girl and an unknown blood group O+. Further investigation report
disclosed that the third blood group (O+) matched with the blood group of
Dharmavijay and Willywonka .
8. Also a medical examination of Dharamvijay (the younger brother of Ranjha Patel)
revelaed that he has a lacerated wound ln his palm. An application under section 53 of
Code of Indica Criminal Procedure was filed before the magistrate to direct
Dharamvijay to give blood sample .
9. Both the villages have the rivalry as in Dabanga only High class Hindus and
economically sound people were their while in Mastana mixed community resides
who are economically very poor .
10. Ranjha Patel and Heer Ben without the consent of their parents got married .
11. Ramraj Singh (local community leader) opposed this marriage and threaten their
parents to stop the marriage or to face social boycott from the society .
12. Police failed to locate the weapons .So police filed an application before Magistrate to
conduct narco -analysis test on the accused Dharmavijay. Willywonka Ram and
Ramraj Singh.The magistrate allowed this application.
13. Based on the statements made during narco test police recovered a knife which was
used in slitting the throat and heavy sticks and heavy stones used to inflict injuries on
the body which were hidden inside a grave in a graveyard situated in Mastana village.
14. To plead innocence Williwonka Ram states that he saw his daughter dead but did not
report and eloped from the crime scene thinking that the incident could trigger
communal riots between two villages. Dharmavijay also stated similar kind of
statement .
15. Further both of them confessed that they murdered under the coercion of Ramraj
Singh
16. After the forensic test of knife and heavy stones , the blood on these weapons got
matched with human blood of A+ and B+. No blood was found on the heavy sticks

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 9
 17. police recovered a eyewitness named Udas Ram a Dalit , aged 75 years and resident
of village Mastana , and recorded the statement that on midnight of 30th april and 1st
May , 2016 he had seen Dharmavijay and Willyonka Ram near the place of recovery
of dead bodies.
18. Based on these evidences trial court held Willywonka and Dharmavijay liable for
murder under section 302 of IPC

ISSUES RAISED

1. Both the appellants are challenging their conviction before the Hon’ble
Court on the ground that they are wrongly convicted ?

2. Both the appellants are challenging the narco-analysis test which was
ordered by the Magistrate during the trial ?

3. Both the appellants are challenging whether this case will fall under the
category of rarest of rare cases (considering the guidelines provided
under the landmark judgment of Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab,
AIR 1980 SC 898) ?

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 10
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
1. Petitioner are justified in challenging the conviction before the

hon’ble Court on the ground that they are wrongly convicted.

 At first police was unable to locate the weapons used for the murder of Heer
Ben and Ranjha Patel. Only after the Narco-Test they were able to locate the
weapons which was not admissible in court as per Indian constitution
 Also based on the statement of Udas Ram 75 years a regular alcoholic , police
arrested Williwonka Ram and Dharmavijay for murder.

2. Appellants are justified in challenging the narco-analysis test which was

ordered by the Magistrate during the trial

(1) Article 20(3) in The Constitution Of India 1949

 No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself.
 In this case also both the appellants were convicted based on the narco-analysis
test which is a type of witness against himself. It is against the Constituion of India
and can be rejected
 Also narco-analysis can be done under the supervidion of expert and it should
be done by the consent of the appellant.
3. Appellants are justified in challenging whether this case falls under the
category of rarest of rare cases
 Their was a coercion from Ramraj Singh on both appellants and also their was force
from the society on parents as both Heer Ben and Ranjha Patel belonged to the
different castes and their was a vast economical difference between them and both
villages were having rivalry with each other. So everyone was against the marriage
and their was a fear of social boycott from the society among parents.

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 11
 ARGUMENT ADVANCED
1. Petitioner are justified in challenging the conviction before the

hon’ble Court on the ground that they are wrongly convicted.

 Because of some flaw in our laws, it is misused by many. In this case also some facts
are misused and manipulated. As per article 20(3) No person accused of any
offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself, but in this case
Narco-analysis test was done of both the appellant and it was used as a
evidence against them. It is violation of article 20(3) because police recovered
weapons based on the narco analysis test. Also their was no mention that it
was done under the supervision of expert.according to the constitution Narco-
analysis is only allowed under the supervision of expert
 Also police took the statement of Udas Ram of 75 years and he was a regular
alcoholic that he saw both appelent on the crime scene .It violets section 85 and 86 of
IPC which says that there are three kinds of abnormal person’s viz. Persons of
unsound mind , persons heavily drunken and minors. These person do not form the
rational thinking and they are not in the right position to state something.
2

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 12
Memorial on behalf of petitioner side
pg. 13
Respondent
Decision of state is maintainable regarding conviction of appellants
1. Honour killing
a) Accused were in fear of social boycott from community
It is a clear case of honour killing as honour killing is a homicide of a member of a family
or social group by other members, due to the belief the victim has brought dishonour upon
the family or community. Thje deatrh of the victim is viewed as a way to restore the
reputation and honour of the family .In this case also parents want to gain their honor because
their child Ranjha patel and Heer both married with each other againt the will of their parents
as hey both belonged to different castes and different economical background . So parents
were afraid of social boycott from the society and other family members. Also they both
belonged to the villages which were rivalvry from long time. That’s why parents were afraids
that this step of their children can arise communal riots in the village .Also community leader
Ramraj Singh also warned them to stop the marriage or face social boycott
b) Heer Ben and Ranjha Patel belong belongs to different caste
Both of them belongs to different caste and also from different economic backgrounds and
also .Mastana and Dabanga village have rivalvry from long time .So any relation betrween
these villages and from different caste can’t be accepted .So to regain the honour of family
and village commu0nity leader also forced them to stop marriage and in the force of the
society and people appelents murdered Heer Ben and Ranjha Patel.
2.Forensic report
a)Forensic analysis revealed human blood bearing three different blood
group.
Report revealed three blood group fom the body of deceased : blood group A+ relating to the
boy Ranjha Patel, blood group B+ relating to the Heer Ben and the third one was unknown
which was O+. Further report revealed that the third group matched with the blood group of

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 14
accused Dharmavijay and Willywonka Ram. This shows that they were involved in murder.
Also their were traces of human blood on the weapons which were recovered after the narco-
analysis test of Willywonka Ram .After further investigation it was revealed that the blood
samples which were collected from the knife belonged to the deceased.

3.Confession
a) Willywonka Ram and Dharmavijay affirmed that the murder was
commited by them under coercion from Ramraj Singh.
As per the section 27 of Evidence Act if something new is discovered from the accused
which was not in the knowledge of the police before disclosure statement of the accused is
recorded, is admissible in the evidence. In this case also it is prima facia from their statement
that they were involved in the murder and this was new fact the muder was commited under
the coercion of their community leader Ramraj Singh

Memorial on behalf of petitioner side

pg. 15