MEMORIAL

V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT

BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 1

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

IN THE MATTER OF

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA..........................RESPONDENTS

VS
AKSHAY..........................................................PETITIONER

AS REGARD APPEAL NO.------/2023

THE APPELLANT HAS APPROCHAED THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ARTICLE 226, INDIAN CONSTITUTION,1950

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 2

TABLE OF CONTENT
1. TABLE OF ABBREVATIONS……………………………………………….
2. TABLE OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………….
3. CASES REFERRED
4. ISSUES RAISED
5. STATEMENT OF FACTS
6. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
7. SUMMARY OF ARGUNENT
8. ARGUMENT ADVANCED
9. PRAYER

-TABLE OF ABBREVATIONS-
MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 3

AIR ALL INDIA RECORD

ANR ANOTHER
APP APPEAL
ART ARTICLE
BOM BOMBAY
CRL CRIMINAL
CRPC CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
MAH MAHARASHTRA
HC HIGH COURT
SC SUPREME COURT
HON’BLE HONOURABLE
POCSO THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM
SEXUAL OFFENCE ACT
JJ ACT JUVENIL JUSTICE ACT
ORS OTHERS
V VERSES
VS VERSES
ETC ET CETRA

-TABLE OF AUTHORITIES-

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 4

*BOOKS REFERRED*

1. IPC BARE ACT

2. THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT,1872 BARE ACT
3. CRIMINAL MINOR ACT, BARE ACT
4. THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 BARE ACT
5. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA BY DR.J. N PANDEY
6. NOTES BY S.P. CLASSES.

*WEBSITE REFERRED*
1. WWW.IPLEADER.COM
2. WWW.INDIANKANOON.COM

-CASES REFERRED-

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 5

1.DR.SR. TESSY JOSE AND ORS V STATE OF KERALA, AIR,2018 S.C.4654

2.SUBHASH CHANDRA RAI V STATE OF SIKKIM, 2018 CRI L.J.3146
3.STATE OF HARYANA V BHAJAN LAL, AIR 1992 SC 604
4.P.C. SEBASTIN V STATE OF KERALA,2019
5.SUDHEESH KUMAR S.R. V STATE OF KERALA,2016

-ISSUE RAISED-

I.

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 6

WHETHER APPEAL FROM WRIT PETITIONER IS MAINTAINABLE IN HON’BLE

HIGH COURT?

II
WHETHER MISTAKE OF LAW IS ACCEPTABLE IN COURT OF LAW?

-STATEMENT OF FACTS-

1. Akshay was a successful graduate from an esteemed college of Pune of

Maharashtra State. Since college time, Akshay was an active social worker.

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 7

After passing the college, Akshay joined a NGO namely “Safal” to give
voluntary services to the downtrodden sct of society along with his regular
job at MNC on his city. The NGO safal worked specially for women and
children in the rural and remote areas who are deprived of their rights and
privileges and who are unware of the same. Being connected to the NGO,
Akshay was very active in providing help to the women and children who
were deprived of education, nutrition also who were subjected to
inequality and crime.
2. There were many instances where the safal with active participation of
Akshay had successfully inspired parents of girl child to give them
permission to carry on their education and sometimes Akshay saved the
married women from domestic volence or sexual abuse and had ended up
attaining justice for such victims.
3. After being associated for as long as 15 years with Safal, Akshay became a
prominent member of NGO and was respected by the State Government
for such a noble contribution to the society. At various conference and
functions, Akshay was awarded and acknowledged for his noble work
which he did for women and girl child.
4. In the year 2020, he came across a girl, named ‘Gudia’ of 9 year of age in
village Khed of Maharashtra, whose parents complaint against an
elementary school teacher ‘Vijay’ who demanded bribe from the said girl
and few more children of the said school for admissions. Also Akshay
noticed numerous irregularities done by the school administration which
violated the Government order regarding collection of fees from the
economically downtrodden students.
5. Eventually Akshay filed a case against the said school teacher Vijay for
demanding bribe from the students later. Akshay came to know that the
same teacher had molested three girls including ‘Gudia’. The parent of
other girl child ‘Baby’, who are molested by the same teacher, had filed a
complaint before the headmaster against sexual assault of their girl child.
But no action was taken by the school management against the said school
teacher Vijay. Thus with the bonafide intention to pressurize the school

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 8

authority, Akshay posted the entire incident of sexual assault done by the
teacher along with details of the molested girls and the accused school
teacher Vijay on Facebook a social media platform. The post which Akshay
wrote gave details about the names, class, division, school and address of
the victim girls.
6. The Home Minister of Maharashtra took cognizance of the post of Akshay
and directed the Police authorities to register a case against the accused
schoolteacher under section 10 of POCSO Act,2012.
7. Police in turn lodged an FIR against said schoolteacher Vijay under S10 of
POCSO act,2012 at Police Station Khed based on said post on Facebook.
8. The child welfare Committee (CWC) ordered registration of an FIR against
Akshay for disclosing the identity of the victim of child sexual abuse under
section 23 of the POCSO Act,2012. According to Akshay, he was unaware
that all such minute details given in the post would attract S 23 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act,2012. Later after two days
noticing the details of victims available on a post he wrote, Vijay deleted
the post from Facebook. But before Vijay could delete the post, the CWC
had already ordered for registration of FIR. Consequently, Police Station,
Khed registered a case under Section 23 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act,2012 against Akshay.
9. The Police are still investigating the case but Akshay has filed a write
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Hon’ble
High Court of Bombay challenging the registration of FIR against him. The
same is still pending, However the court granted interim order that Akshay
be not arrested till further order, while issuing notice to the State of
Maharashtra.
10. Aggrieved by the registration on FIR against him. School Teacher Vijay
also filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 for quashing the FIR mainly on
ground that FIR cannot be lodged based on social media report. The HC of
Bombay admitted his petition and issued notice to State of Maharashtra.
Now the petition filed by Vijay is listed for final hearing.

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,2023 9

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

REGARD WRIT PETITION NO.-------/2023

THE APPELLANT HAS APPROCHAED THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

UNDER ARTICLE 226, CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950.SUBSEQUENTLY, THE SPECIAL

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202310

LEAVE HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE COURT. THE RESPONDENT HUMBLY SUBMIT TO
THE JURISDICTION OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.

-ISSUES RAISED-

I.
WHETHER APPEAL FROM PETITIONER IS MAINTAINABLE IN HON’BLE HIGH
COURT?
MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202311

II
WHETHER MISTAKE OF LAW IS ACCEPTABLE IN COURT OF LAW?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
I.
WHETHER APPEAL FROM PETITIONER IS MAINTAINABLE IN HON’BLE HIGH
COURT?
While the matter is in progress in the lower court and petitioner already have
interim relief by Hon’ble HC for ‘not to arrest’ till further order. This writ petitioner
from petitioner is not maintainable in HC.

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202312

II
WHETHER MISTAKE OF LAW IS ACCEPTABLE IN COURT OF LAW?
Petitioner 1 plead that he is not aware that identity disclose on social media of
deceased leads to FIR on him against POSCO Act,2012. Mere mistake of law is not
admissible in court of Law.

-ARGUMENTS ADVANCED-

I.
WHETHER APPEAL FROM PETITIONER IS MAINTAINABLE IN HON’BLE HIGH
COURT?

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202313

I) Right to petition under 226 of constitution is not natural or inherent right.

In the absence of substantial question of law, allowing an appeal would
further damage the original plaintiff and lead to miscarriage of justice by
unnecessary delaying the justice delivery process of dispute.
II) Apex court has already reiterated in many of its judgements that the
circumspection must induce the Court to interfere with the decision
under challenge only if the extraordinary flaws or grave injustice or other
recognized grounds are made out .it is only when some glaring error
leading to grave failure of justice is made out, that the Supreme Court
would allow its jurisdiction to be invoked
III) In instant case, the appellant failed to show that there exist special
grounds to invoke this petition. It is submitted that the remedy under the
section need not to be exercised in cases where substantial justice already
done. The Hon’ble Supreme Court ca interfere only when the findings are
erroneous, perverse and results in miscarriage of justice

a. The Hon’ble court cannot be turned into mere fact finding enquiry

The principle settled by way of practice and procedure is that Supreme

Court would not disturb the decision specially constituted authorities,
as an appeal court and would not review findings of fact except where
they are perverse or shocking to the judicial conscience. The power of
Supreme Court is of widest amplitude and court would interfere only
exceptional cases. E.g. violation of principle of natural justice or
because the appeal raises the important question of law which requires
the interference of constitutional Court

II. WHETHER MISTAKE OF LAW IS ACCEPTABLE IN COURT OF LAW?

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202314

1. Petitioner 1 plead that he is not aware that identity disclose on social media
of deceased leads to FIR on him against POSCO Act,2012. Mere mistake of
law is not admissible in court of Law.
2. Petitioner 2 plead that FIR can’t have lodged on the basis of reports on social
media but in many cases Apex Court directed that it can be done
3. Though petitioner 1 is social worker since last 15 years and he done very
much social work for women empowered but the fact is that he is educated
and well knower of social and political life. Petitioner 1 must aware that “he
doesn’t know about that law” is not excuse acceptable in court of law.

- PRAYER-
Wherefore, in the light of the facts stated, issues raised, authorities cited and
arguments advanced, it is most humbly prayed and implored before the
Honourable Court, that it may be graciously pleased to adjudge and declare that
1. The writ petition file before Hon’ble Supreme is not
maintainable
2. Quashing of FIR is not valid

MEM
 MEMORIAL
V.P. LAW COLLEGE ON BEHALF OFCOURT
BARAMATI,MOOT RESPONDENT
COMPETITION,202315

And Pass any other Order, Direction, or Relief that it may deem fit in the Best
Interests of Justice, Fairness, Equity & Good Conscience.
For This Act of Kindness, the Respondent Shall Duty Bound Forever Pray.

Respectfully Submitted
-COUNSELS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-
(______________)
s/d

MEM