TC – 013R

B.M. SREENIVASAIAH MEMORIAL 8TH NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION, 2024

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME

COURT OF NAHIRA

APPEAL NO.__/__OF 2024

UNDER ARTICLE 132 R/W ARTICLE 134A OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF NAHIRA

SOTHER BOLAN & ORS.…….………….….……..……….………………….APPELLANT NO. 1

MR. QUANKAR……………..…………….………..………..…...………..…..APPELLANT NO. 2

V/S

UNION OF NAHIRA & ANR……………………………………….…………….. RESPONDENTS

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS

COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME
COURT OF NAHIRA
B.M. SREENIVASAIAH MEMORIAL 8TH NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2023

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS

 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………..…………………………...4
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………..………………………………………………………….5-8
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION……………………………………….……………………..9
STATEMENT OF FACTS…………………………………………………..
………………….10
STATEMENT OF ISSUES………………………………………………..……………………11
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS………………………………………………...…………..12-13
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED...…………………………………………………………...…14-32

I. THAT THE NWB AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE NOT STATE UNDER ARTICLE 12 AND
CAN, HENCE, CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR VILATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS...
……………………………………………………………………………….……….….14-20
I.1. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD OF NAHIRA AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE
AUTONOMOUS BODIES………………………………………….………………………………14-
18
I.1.1. NWB HAS NOT BEEN CREATED BY THE MEANS OF ANY STATUTE AND IS
ADMINISTERED BY THE SAME…..
…………………………………………………………....15
I.1.2. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD IS NEITHER FINANCIALLY NOR
FUNCTIONALLY CONTROLLED OR DOMINATED BY THE
GOVERNMENT………………………………….16
I.1.3. CATCHER PVT. LTD. IS NOT AN INSTRUMENT OF THE STATE OR ANY STATUTORY
BODY AND IT DOES NOT FALL UNDER THE AMBIT OF ‘OTHER AUTHORITIES’
UNDER ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
NAHIR...............................................................17-18
I.2. THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE BOLAN
WRESTLERS AND THE COMMUNITY AS A
WHOLE……………………………………………………….…18-20
I.2.1. SAFEGUARDING RIGHT TO EQUALITY AND PRINCIPLES OF
DISCRIMINATION…………………………………………………………..………………..18-20

II. THAT THE INVOCATION OF THE NADA RULES AGAINST THE BOLAN ATHLETES FOR
THE USE OF 'ACTOPROTECTORS' IN 'BATAVARI SRAHMI RAS,' A TRADITIONAL
MEDICINE AND THE IMPOSITION OF LIFETIME SUSPENSIONS ON SOTHER BOLAN,

3|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
ETHER BOLAN, AND NOVER BOLAN IS NOT BAD IN LAW ALLOWING SAME-SEX
MARRIAGE COMES UNDER THE AMBIT OF LEGISLATURE AND NOT
JUDICIARY…………………………………………………………………….…………………..20-25
II.1. THE ATHLETES' SAMPLES INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF A PROHIBITED
SUBSTANCE……………………………………………………………………………………….20-22
II.1.1. SUFFICIENT PROOF OF ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATION WAS ESTABLISHED BY
NWB………………………………………………………………………………………….……21
II.1.2. ACTOPROTECTORS ARE A PROHIBITED SUBSTANCE IN THE COMPETITION AND
NOT OUTSIDE THE COMPETITION……………………………...
……………………………….21-22
II.2. THE SUSPENSION ORDER STANDS VALID……………………………………………………22-
25
II.2.1. STRICT LIABILITY APPLICATION……………………………...………………………….23-
24
II.2.2. THE PUNISHMENT IMPOSED UPON THE ATHLETES ARE GIVEN ACCORDING TO THE
RULES ENSHRINED IN THE NADA RULES, 2015……………………………..………….24-25

III. THAT THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN CATCHER PVT LTD. AND NWB, INFRINGES
UPON THE RELIABILITY AND CREDIBILITY OF THE AI GENERATED ANTI-DOPING
RESULTS AND WHETHER SUCH COLLABORATION INFRINGES UPON THE RIGHTS AND
PRINCIPLES SAFEGUARDED UNDER THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STATE OF
NAHIRA……………………………………………………………………………………...……..25-32
III.1. THE LEGITIMACY OF THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN CATHER PVT. LTD. AND
NWB IS SUBSTANTIATED BY LEGAL PROVISIONS IN ALL
ASPECTS………………………………………………………………………..………………….25-28
III.1.1. POWER OF THE PRESIDENT OF NWB TO FORMULATE SUCH JOINT
EFFORT……………………………………………………………………………………………26
III.1.2. THE REQUIREMENT OF AI CAN BE DENIED NO FURTHER………………………..…..27-
28
III.2. NWB HAS FOLLOWED THE LEGAL REGIME IN EMPLOYING AI FOR DRUG
TESTING……………………………………………………………………………………………28-29
III.2.1. SUBSTANCES TESTED AND METHODS USED UPHELD THE SAFEGUARD
FOR THE WRESTLERS…………………………………………………………………….…28-
29
III.3. MODULAR METHODS OF DETECTION AND COMBATING THE TRADITIONAL
LIMITATIONS USED BY THE CATCHER PVT. LTD…………………………………………...29-
30
III.3.1. AI DRUG TESTING OVERCOMES THE LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL
METHODS………………………………………………………………………………..……29-30
III.4. LEGAL PROVISIONS TOWARDS THE ADMISSIBILITY OF RESULT GENERATED

4|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
BY THE COMPUTER BASED SYSTEM I.E. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ALGORITHM……………30-32
III.4.1. DEFINING DIGITAL EVIDENCE WITH REFERENCE TO AI-GENERATED
REPORT…………………………………………………………………………………………...31

PRAYER………………………………………………………………………………………33

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS EXPANDED FORM

AIR All India Report

& And
ART. Article
AI Artificial Intelligence
CDSCO Central Drugs Standard Control
Organization
CONST. Constitution
CAS Court Of Arbitration For Sport
HC High Court
HON’BLE Honourable
JSW Jindal Education And Medical Trust And
Jindal South-West Foundation
K.B. King’s Bench
NADA National Anti-Doping Agency
NWB National Wrestling Board
NO. Number
ORS. Others

5|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

¶ Paragraph
¶¶ Paragraphs
Q.B. Queen’s Bench
R/W Read With
§ §
SCC Supreme Court Cases
U/A Under Article
U/§ Under §
V. Versus
WADA World Anti-Doping Agency

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES

1. Societies Registration Act, 1860.

2. The 2015 Prohibited List by the World Anti-Doping Agency.
3. The Constitution of India, 1950.
4. The General Clauses Act, 1897.
5. The National Anti-Doping Agency Rules, 2015.
6. The World Anti-Doping Code, 2015.
7. World Anti-Doping Code International Standard Testing and Investigations, 2015.

LEGAL DATABASES

1. AIR Online.
2. E-Library.
3. Hein Online.
4. Inflibnet N-list.
5. LawStreetIndia.
6. LexisNexis.
7. Manupatra.

6|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
8. SCC Online.
9. West Law.

DICTIONARIES AND LAW LEXICONS

1. Black Law’s Dictionary.

2. Legal Glossary, Ministry of Law and Justice.
3. Merriam Webster Dictionary.
4. Oxford Dictionary.
5. P Ramanatha Aiyar's Advanced Law Lexicon, 2017.
6. Wharton’s Law Lexicon, 1019.
BOOKS, TREATIES, PERIODICALS AND RESEARCH PAPERS

1. ALBERT A. EHRENZWEIG, THE LEX FORI - BASIC RULE IN THE CONFLICT

OF LAWS, 58 MICH. L. REV. 637 (1960).
2. BASU D.D, CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 14TH EDITION 2009, LEXISNEXIS,
BUTTERWORTHS WADHWA PUBLICATION NAGPUR.
3. BEHURA N.K. PANIGRAHI NILAKANTHA, TRIBALS AND THE INDIAN
CONSTITUTION, EDITION 2006, RAWAT PUBLICATIONS.
4. CHARLES FEENEY KNAPP, DRUG-TESTING AND THE STUDENT-ATHLETE:
MEETING THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGE, 76 IOWA L. REV. 107, 112
(1990).
5. CLAUDE BENNETT ET AL. EDS., 2 CECIL BOOK OF MEDICINE 1201 (19TH
ED. 1992).
6. DR. PK AGARWAL AND DR. KN CHATURVEDI, CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,
PRABHAT PUBLICATIONS.
7. E EDWARD F. DOLAN, DRUGS IN SPORTS 17 (2D ED. 1992).
8. HISTORY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN MEDICIN E, VIVEK KAU ,
SARAH ENSLI N, AND SETH A.GROSS, GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY,
OCTOBER 2020, 92(4): 807-815; HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1016/J.GIE.2020.06.040.
9. KEN LISKA, THE PHARMACIST'S GUIDE TO THE MOST MISUSED &
ABUSED DRUGS (1988) KEN LISKA, THE PHARMACIST'S GUIDE TO THE
MOST MISUSED & ABUSED DRUGS (1988).
10. LIEBMAN, MICHAEL. "THE ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN DRUG

7|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
DISCOVERY AND DEVELOPMENT" CHEMISTRY INTERNATIONAL, VOL.
44, NO. 1, 2022, PP. 16-19. HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1515/CI-2022-0105.
11. MOUCHLIS VD ET AL., ADVANCES IN DE NOVO DRUG DESIGN: FROM
CONVENTIONAL TO MACHINE LEARNING METHODS. INT J MOL SCI., 22 ,
224-226 (2021).

TABLE OF CASES

SL. NO. CASE NAME CITATION PAGE

NO.
1. Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib , (1981) 1 SCC 14,17
722

2. Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India 1951 AIR 19

1951

3. Dharambir v Central Bureau of Investigation 2008 SCC 336 31

4. E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu 1974 AIR 555 18

5. Mariano Puerta v. International Tennis CAS 21
Federation 2006/A/1025
6. Mohd. Jafar Iqbal v. Union of India & Ors W.P.(C)- 25
4589/2020
7. Om Prakash v Central Bureau of Investigation 2017 SCC 31
10249
(CBI),

8. Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs Indian Institute Of Appeal (civil) 15

992 of 2002
Chemical Biology

9. Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice Tendolkar AIR 1958 SC 18

538

8|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
10. RD Shetty v. International Airport Authority AIR 1979 SC 16
of India 1628
11. Rylands v. Fletcher Rylands v. 23
Fletcher
[1868] UKHL
1
12. Sabhajit Tewary v. UOI 1975 SCC (1) 14
485
13. State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 30,31
600.

14. Zee Telefilms V. Union Of India 2005 4 SCC 15

649

9|Page
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

With references to the circumstances that have been presented in the instant case, the
Appellants have approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Nahira under Article 1321 r/w
Article 134A2 of the Constitution of Nahira for the violation of fundamental rights enumerated
in Part III of the constitution. The Respondent maintains that no violation of rights has taken
place. Therefore, this Hon’ble Court need not entertain its jurisdiction.

1
Article 132 – Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in certain cases-

(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree or final order of a High Court in the
territory of India, whether in a civil, criminal or other proceeding, if the High Court certifies under article 134A
that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution.

(3) Where such a certificate is given, any party in the case may appeal to the Supreme Court on the ground that
any such question as aforesaid has been wrongly decided.
2
Certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court-

Every High Court, passing or making a judgment, decree, final order, or sentence, referred to in clause (1) of
article 132 or clause (1) of article 133, or clause (1) of article 134-(a)may, if it deems fit so to do, on its own
motion; and(b)shall, if an oral application is made, by or on behalf of the party aggrieved, immediately after the
passing or making of such judgment, decree, final order or sentence, determine, as soon as may be after such
passing or making, the question whether a certificate of the nature referred to in clause (1) of article 132, or
clause (1) of article 133 or, as the case may be, sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of article 134, may be given in
respect of that case.

10 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I. PARTIES TO THE DISPUTE:

1. Sother Bolan, Ether Bolan, and Nover Bolan are Appellant No. 1 in the present
matter. They are the athletes who were caught on charges of using disbanded drugs
during the national games 2015. They are representing the Bolam Community.
2. Mr. Quankar is Appellant No. 2 in the present matter who has approached the
Supreme Court for violations of Fundamental Rights of athletes against Bolam
community.
3. The Respondents in the present matter is “Union of India and Ors.”

II. BACKGROUND AND PRECURSSOR TO THE DISPUTE:

4. Three Bolan wrestlers were caught using banned substances at national games. This
resulted in their suspension by the NWB, which raised concerns about doping
practices and the cultural significance of certain indigenous remedies in the Bolan
community.
5. The implementation of a state-of-the-art drug testing program by Catcher Pvt. Ltd. in
collaboration with NWB sparked controversy, with allegations of selective testing
disproportionately affecting athletes from the Bolan community.

III. THE DISPUTE:

6. Bolan athletes contends that the suspension order was bad in law since the
consumption of the traditional medicine was an old-age practice, a customary

11 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
practice, having no effects on the performance of the athletes.
7. Mr. Quankar contends that the actions of NWB and Catcher Pvt. Ltd., violate the
fundamental rights to equality and fair treatment of the Bolam Community under the
law, prompting legal challenges in the Supreme Court of Nahira.

IV. THE RESULTANT LITIGATION:

8. Pursuant to the aforementioned factual matrix, The Supreme Court of Nahira has
taken up all of these issues and grouped them together for a joint hearing by
establishing the main points for consideration. The High Court of Zahura has ruled in
favour of NWB and Catcher Pvt. Ltd. in both the matters.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

I. WHETHER NWB AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE STATES UNDER ARTICLE
12 AND SHALL BE HELD LIABLE FOR VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL
RIGHTS?

II. WHETHER THE INVOCATION OF THE NADA RULES, 2015, AGAINST THE
BOLAN ATHLETES FOR THE USE OF 'ACTOPROTECTORS' IN 'BATAVARI
SRAHMI RAS,' A TRADITIONAL MEDICINEAND THE IMPOSITION OF
LIFETIME SUSPENSIONS ON SOTHER BOLAN, ETHER BOLAN, AND
NOVER BOLAN IS BAD IN LAW?

III. WHETHER THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN CATCHER PVT LTD. AND

NWB, INFRINGES UPON THE RELIABILITY AND CREDIBILITY OF THE
GENERATED ANTI-DOPING RESULTS BY AI?

12 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I. THAT THE NWB AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE NOT STATE UNDER
ARTICLE 12 AND HENCE, CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR
VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS.

The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly submits that the Petition filed by
the Bolan athletes and Mr. Quankar is not maintainable as the National Wrestling
Board of Nahira and Catcher Pvt. Ltd. Company does not come under the ambit of
state under Article 12, there exists no substantial question of law and most of all
Part III of the Constitution of Nahira cannot be invoked herein. The same shall be
proved in a two-fold manner. (1.1)THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD OF
NAHIRA AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE AUTONOMOUS BODIES and (1.2)
THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE
BOLAN WRESTLERS AND THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

II. THAT THE INVOCATION OF THE NADA RULES, 2015, AGAINST THE
BOLAN ATHLETES FOR THE USE OF 'ACTOPROTECTORS' IN
'BATAVARI SRAHMI RAS,' A TRADITIONAL MEDICINE AND THE
IMPOSITION OF LIFETIME SUSPENSIONS ON SOTHER BOLAN,

13 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
ETHER BOLAN, AND NOVER BOLAN IS NOT BAD IN LAW.

The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly submits that the consumption of
Batavari Shrami Ras explicitly violates the NADA Rules, 2015 on grounds of
prohibited substance. The same shall be proved in a two-fold manner. (2.1) THE
ATHLETES' SAMPLES INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF A PROHIBITED
SUBSTANCE and (2.2)THE SUSPENSION ORDER STANDS VALID.

III. THAT THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN CATCHER PVT LTD. AND

NWB, DOES NOT INFRINGES UPON THE RELIABILITY AND
CREDIBILITY OF THE GENERATED ANTI-DOPING RESULTS BY AI.

It is humbly submitted to the apex court of Nahira , that the collaboration of

catcher pvt. Ltd. and NWB is within the statutory framework of legal provisions
in the state of Nahira , without having any material infringement upon the existing
legislations of the state of Nahira. The same is depicted in a manner of four
aspects, which are as (2.1) THE LEGITIMACY OF THE COLLABORATION
BETWEEN CATHER PVT. LTD. AND NWB IS SUBSTANTIATED BY LEGAL
PROVISIONS IN ALL ASPECTS and (2.2) NWB HAS FOLLOWED THE LEGAL
REGIME IN EMPLOYING AI FOR DRUG TESTING and (2.3) MODULAR
METHODS OF DETECTION AND COMBATING THE TRADITIONAL
LIMITATIONS USED BY THE CATCHER PVT. LTD and (2.4) LEGAL
PROVISIONS TOWARDS THE ADMISSIBILITY OF RESULT GENERATED BY
THE COMPUTER BASED SYSTEM I.E. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
ALGORITHM.

14 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I. THAT THE NWB AND CATCHER PVT. LTD. ARE NOT STATE UNDER
ARTICLE 12 AND CAN, HENCE, CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR
VILATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

1. The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly submits that the Petition filed by the
Bolan athletes and Mr. Quankar is not maintainable as the National Wrestling Board
of Nahira and Catcher Pvt. Ltd. Company does not come under the ambit of state
under Article 12, there exists no substantial question of law and most of all Part III of
the Constitution of Nahira cannot be invoked herein. The same shall be proved in a
two-fold manner.

1.1. THE NATIONAL WRESTLING BOARD OF NAHIRA AND CATCHER PVT.

LTD. ARE AUTONOMOUS BODIES:

2. It is humbly submitted that, to confer on a body, the status of a state the evolution of
Article 12 has to be studied. In Sabhajit Tewary v. UOI,3 the court held the body in
question not to be covered under Article 12, because of the reason that its origin or
3
Sabhajit Tewary v. UOI 1975 SCC (1) 485

15 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
genesis was not from any Statute. The law experiencd Drastic changes started coming
in the proposition of Shabhajit Tewary’s judgment starting from Ramana Dayaram
Shetty case and then Ajay Hasia case4 also indicated that statutory genesis is not the
basis of various tests discussed further.

3. Thereafter a larger bench in Pradeep Kumar Biswas case laid down the following
parameters for gauging whether a particular body could be termed as State for the
purpose of Article 12:-

"The question in each case would be whether in the light of the cumulative facts as
established, the body is financially, functionally and administratively dominated by
or under the control of the Government. Such control must be particular to the body
in question and must be pervasive. If this is found then the body is a State within
Article 12. On the other hand, when the control is merely regulatory whether under
statute or otherwise, it would not serve to make the body a State."5

4. The aforementioned judgements points in the sole direction i.e. NWB and the Catcher
Pvt. Ltd. are private entities and does not come under the definition of State as per
Article 12 of the Constitution of Nahira. While NWB is registered under the Societies
Registration Act, 1860 Catcher Pvt. Ltd is a private entity independent from
governmental control, financing and interference. The same shall be proved in the
subsequent submissions.

1.1.1. NWB has not been created by the means of any statute and is administered by the
same

5. It is humbly contented that the National Wrestling Board of Nahira has not been
created by any statute and is only registered under the Societies Registration Act,
1860. Hence, it is an autonomous and an independent body which is not controlled by
any other authority including the Union of Nahira. The NWB is only responsible to
oversee the sport of wrestling in the country and to organise national and international
events.

4
Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib, (1981) 1 SCC 722
5
Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs Indian Institute Of Chemical Biology Appeal (civil) 992 of 2002

16 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

6. In the case of Zee Telefilms v. UOI6, the Supreme Court held, despite the fact that
BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) had a monopoly on cricket control, the
state neither granted nor protected this monopoly by any kind of statute. Thus, the
court held that BCCI does not fall within the ambit of state under the definition of
‘State’ under Article 12.

7. The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly contends that NWB is a

federation/body similar to that of BCCI. NWB is also registered under the Societies
Registration Act, 1860, and exercises similar kind of functions in a different sport.

1.1.2. The National Wrestling Board is neither financially nor functionally controlled or
dominated by the government

8. It is further submitted that the board unequivocally declares that it never accepts any
financial assistance from the Government of Nahira nor is subjected to any of
financial scrutiny or control by the government. It is an autonomous body which is
responsible for raising its own funds through sponsorships, competitions,
broadcasting rights etc., wherein the government has no role to play in it. 7 Also, there
is no other law that prohibits the formation of parallel organisations in the field of
wrestling.

9. Furthermore, the constitution of NWB under Article 6 (c) and (e) highlight the
financial independence of the Board making it an autonomous body free from
governmental control or interference.

10. It is humbly submitted that the NWB is an independent and an autonomous body that
is not controlled by the Government of Nahira in any manner. In the case of RD
Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India8., Justice P.N. Bhagwati mentioned
five points to understand whether the 'body' in the news is instrumental in being called
the 'State' under Article 12 or not. They are:-

6
zee telefilms v. union of india 2005 4 SCC 649
7
Wrestling Federation of India. Constitution. United World Wrestling.
8
RD Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India AIR 1979 SC 1628.

17 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
 The body can be called as a state, if its entire share capital is held by the
state.
 If the body has a governmental functional character.
 The absolute control of such body lies with the Government.
 Such body has an element of command and authority or,
 The body is discharging any sort of public service.

11. In the present matter, none of the above 5 condition is getting fulfilled. The NWB
completely acts as an autonomous body free from that of governmental control.
Neither it carries out any sort of public function, nor is any percentage of share capital
held by that of Government of Nahira.

1.1.3. Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is not an instrument of the state or any statutory body and it does
not fall under the ambit of ‘Other Authorities’ under Article 12 of the Constitution of
Nahira

12. It is humbly submitted that Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is not an instrument of the state or any
statutory body so as to fall under the ambit of ‘Other Authorities’ under Article 12 of
the Constitution of Nahira.

13. In the case of Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi9, it was determined that whether
a statutory body falls under the definition of "other authorities" and should be treated
differently. The court laid down certain tests to adjudge whether a body is an
instrumentality of the government or not:-

 When the government owns the entire share capital of a body, it can be
interpreted as a government instrumentality.
 If the government provides financial assistance that covers almost all
expenses, it may indicate that the organisation has a governmental character.
 Monopoly status granted or protected by the state is a relevant factor to
consider.

9
Ajay Hasia v Khalid Mujib, (1981) 1 SCC 722.

18 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
 The existence of deep and pervasive state control may indicate that the body is
a state instrumentality.
 If the body's functions are of public importance and closely related to
governmental functions, it is relevant to treat the body as an instrumentality of
the government.

14. In the present matter, the government does not even own a partial share capital of
Catcher nor does it provide financial assistance to it in any manner that can cover all
the expenses. Moreover, the government has not granted Catcher Pvt. Ltd. any kind of
monopoly status, but it is merely a Pvt. Ltd. organisation functioning on its own like
every other Private body. The existence of control factor of the state does not even
arise in the present matter and also, Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is not carrying out any kind of
functions that are of public importance or are closely related to governmental
functions. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that Catcher Pvt. Ltd. is not an
instrumentality or agency of the state and merely functions like a private body or
organisation.

1.2. THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE

BOLAN WRESTLERS AND THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE

15. The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly submits that the fundamental rights
of the Bolan community have not been violated by the National Wrestling Board
(NWB) or Catcher Pvt. Ltd. The meticulous adherence to NADA Rules, fair testing
strategy and AI scrutiny, opportunity of representation to all communities and overall
preservation of integrity of sports by the Board has been a testament to their
commitment to upliftment of the country and protection of fundamental rights of all
citizens.

1.2.1. Safeguarding Right to Equality and Principles of discrimination:

16. It is humbly submitted that Article 14 enshirnes a ‘reasonable classification test’10

and a ‘test of arbitrariness’11. The test, subsequently favour with the Supreme Court,
10
Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice Tendolkar, AIR 1958 SC 538.
11
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1974 AIR 555.

19 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
postulates that the equality envisaged by Article 14 includes a guarantee against
arbitrariness in State action i.e. ensure fairness. In the present matter 15 athletes were
representing the Bolam Community, out of which 10 wrestlers were the prodigies of
Quaker. However, only 3 wrestlers out of the 15 were caught for using prohibited
substances. This proves that the basis of conviction was not their association with Mr.
Quanker, appellant No. 2, or the fact that they hailed form the Bolam Community but
solely the presence of a prohibited substance in their samples.

17. It is further submitted that NWB has followed the due process of law and has adhered
closely to the NADA Rules in the procedure of suspecting, sampling, suspending the
three wrestlers. The rules provide for a life-time suspension for repeat offenders under
Article 10 and abiding by the same, the Board penalised the three Wrestlers. Anti-
doping measures seek to ensure fair competition and protect the integrity of sports,
and the wrestlers were sanctioned in accordance with established rules and protocols.
This establishes fairness and transparency in the respondent’s conduct and therefore,
passes the test of arbitrariness thereby standing in conformity with Article 14.

18. The court must note that so far so the other wrestlers from the Bolan Community are
concerned, the NWB’s decision to incorporate state of the art AI testing facilites
cannot be challenged on the gorunds of Equality or Discrimination. Article 15 ensures
that no citizen is discriminated against on the basis of caste, sex, race, religion or
place of birth. Even though, it is a settled fact that Bolam Communtiy is an
impoverished and economically weaker sect of the society and that Mr. Quanker had
to face stigmatisation and discrimination throughout his career, yet, there lies not a
shred of proof establishing the NWB a party to such discrimination.

19. Furthermore, it is brought to the court’s attention that Appellant No. 2’s contention
that NWB lacks representation from Bolam community can be countered with the fact
that not only was he offered the post of chairman at NWB but it was him who
blatantly denied this opportunity out of free will. The refusal and the reasoning for the
same weaken the appellant’s claim of lack of representation.

20 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
20. It is humbly submitted that NWB has followed a transparent due process in
collaborating with Catcher Pvt. Ltd. to cater to the president’s aim of ensuring
accurate detection and effective deterrance of performance-enhancing substances
among wrestlers, showcasing a proactive approach to maintaining the integrity of the
sport. No facts have come forth to showcase a discrimination in the application of AI
algorithm against the Bolan Community nor has there been an incident of lack of
opportunity or disregard of talent from the end of the respondent. The focus on Bolan
wrestlers was not based on ethnicity but on observed patterns and performance
indicators. AI testing serves the aim of enhance efficiency and accuracy, providing a
more sophisticated and nuanced approach to drug testing.

21. The Supreme Court of Nahira ruled in Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India12,
that a law is constitutional even if it is applied differently to a specific individual
under certain circumstances. To challenge the constitutionality of a law, one must
demonstrate that the law is unreasonable and arbitrary in its application in that
particular case. Therefore, Mr. Quanker’s claim for violation of principles of non-
discrimination and equality must be denied by this Hon’ble Court while the
transparency and adherence to rules by the respondent irrespective of the origin of a
wrestler must stand valid and appreciated. Lastly, the Hon’ble High Court of Zahura
has rightly dismissed the writ petition against NWB & Catcher Pvt. Ltd., stating that
NWB acted within its powers and did not violate the principles of equality.

II. THAT THE INVOCATION OF THE NADA RULES AGAINST THE

BOLAN ATHLETES FOR THE USE OF 'ACTOPROTECTORS' IN
'BATAVARI SRAHMI RAS,' A TRADITIONAL MEDICINE AND THE
IMPOSITION OF LIFETIME SUSPENSIONS ON SOTHER BOLAN,
ETHER BOLAN, AND NOVER BOLAN IS NOT BAD IN LAW

22. The counsel on behalf of the respondents humbly submits that the consumption of
Batavari Shrami Ras explicitly violates the NADA Rules, 2015, on grounds of
prohibited substance. The same shall be proved in a 2-fold manner.

12
Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India 1951 AIR 1951.

21 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
2.1. THE ATHLETES' SAMPLES INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF A
PROHIBITED SUBSTANCE:

23. It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that there was a presence of
‘Actoprotectors’ in the blood samples of the suspended athletes, after the drug testing
program. As per Article 2.1.1 of the NADA Rules, 2015,13 it is the personal duty of
each athlete to ensure that no prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers are
found to be present in their sample. Therefore, an anti-doping rule violation is
committed as per this Article without regard to an athlete’s fault. Thus, NADA
follows the principle of ‘Strict Liability’ under this regard. Strict liability in the Code
is based on the premise that an athlete's intent is difficult to prove and that all doping
is inherently harmful to all players in a game.

24. In the 2006 CAS case of Mariano Puerta v. International Tennis Federation,14 the
appellant Puerta, a tennis player, unknowingly consumed a prohibited substance
while drinking water from the same glass that his wife used to take medication.
Despite the presence of evidence that Puerta did not intentionally use the performance
enhancer, the Court applied the Code and charged him with doping. This shows the
strict application of the World Anti-Doping Code when a prohibited substance is
found inside the body of an athlete. Thus, the fact that the Bolan athletes were
consuming Batavari Shrami Ras, wherein actoprotectors was found inside the body
without any sort of fault or negligence is immaterial.

25. In an infamous case, an Indian Cricketer named Prithvi Shaw was sanctioned with a
suspension of 8 months for a doping violation in the 2018-19 domestic season. The
right-handed batsman inadvertently consumed a prohibited substance, which is
commonly found in cough syrups. His urine sample was tested and found to have
Terbutaline that is a specified substance and is prohibited both in and out competition
in the WADA Prohibited List of substances. The cricketer did not consume the
prohibited substance intentionally, still he was suspended for a specified period of
time, which shows that any sort of fault or negligence is immaterial in establishing the
guilt under the ambit of Anti-Doping Rules.

13
NADA Rules, 2015, art. 2.1.1.
14
Mariano Puerta v. International Tennis Federation, CAS 2006/A/1025.

22 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

2.1.1. Sufficient proof of Anti-Doping Rule Violation was established by

NWB

26. The counsel on behalf of the appellants humbly submits that the National Wrestling
Board of Nahira has established a sufficient proof of Anti-Doping Rule violation as
per the rules enshrined under the NADA Rules, 2015. As per Article 2.1.2 of the
NADA Rules, 2015, the presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or
markers in the sample of the athletes is a sufficient proof or ground that the athletes
have consumed any sort of prohibited substance there has been a violation of the
rules.

2.1.2. Actoprotectors are a prohibited substance in the competition and not

outside the competition:

27. It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the substance called
‘Actoprotectors’ are a prohibited substance in-competition. The Bolan athletes were
caught using disbanded drugs in the year 2015 during the national games of Nahira.
Thus, the athletes were caught consuming the substance while they were in the
competition and not some other time.

28. The S6 category of The 2015 Prohibited List as per the World Anti-Doping Code by
WADA explicitly prohibits the use of Bromantan (Actoprotectors) by the athletes
while they are playing in the competition. This situation applied to the present
scenario as the three athletes were caught using the prohibited substance during the
National Games of 2015. Therefore, it can be safely concluded that an athlete's use of
a prohibited substance is an anti-doping rule violation unless it is not prohibited out of
competition and the use occurs outside of competition, however, the presence of a
Prohibited Substance, its Metabolites, or Markers in an In-Competition Sample
constitutes a violation of Article2.1, regardless of when the substance was
administered.

2.2. THE SUSPENSION ORDER STANDS VALID:

23 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

29. It is brought to the Hon’ble Court’s humble attention that Article 1 of the Anti-Doping
Rules, 2015 by NADA talks about the application of the rules to the National
federations in the country of Nahira. As per Article 1.2.1 and Article 1.2.2 of the
same, the National Federations have the responsibility to abide by the rules and give
effect to the rules of NADA. They are also required to incorporate these Anti-
Doping Rules either directly or by reference into their governing documents,
constitution or any other rules that bind their members and participants. Thus, in the
present matter, NWB was right in its conduct while carrying out the procedures
enshrined in the Anti-Doping Rules, 2015.

30. It is humbly submitted that Article 3 of the Rules talks about the proof of doping. As
per Article 3.1 of the same, NWB acting under NADA is responsible for proving a
violation of anti-doping rules. The standard of proof is whether NADA has
established an anti-doping rule violation to the hearing panel's satisfaction, taking
into account the seriousness of the allegation. This standard of proof is higher than a
simple balance of probability, but lower than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The
burden of proof for anti-doping rule violations falls on the athlete or person accused to
rebut a presumption or establish specific facts. The standard of proof is based on a
balance of probabilities.

2.2.1. Strict Liability Application:

31. It is brought to the court’s humble attention that among many principles of liability,
lies that of ‘strict liability’ which is applied in cases of certain sporting offences that
follow a zero-tolerance policy. It involves cases of betting and match-fixing along
with those of Anti-Dopping. It must be noted that the general elements of strict
liability entail that a legal obligation is cast upon a person, without a fault of the
person having to be proved. This can be reformulated to mean that a person who
causes danger to another is entitled to do so, but must take into account the potential
obligation to compensate for no-fault damage.15 This rule was evolved in the case of

15
Janno Lahe, Regulation of Strict Liability in the CFR and the Estonian Law of Obligations Act, XVII
JURIDICA INTERNATIONAL (2010).

24 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
Rylands v. Fletcher,16 where it was held that no mens rea was required in order to
prove liability. Thus, there is no finding of fault, which can be in the nature of
negligence or tortious intent.

32. It is brought to the court’s attention that similar rules are extrapolated in the Anti-
doping Laws around the world and therefore, in the country of Nahira. Every athlete,
by participating in a sport and/or by affiliating himself to a sporting federation accepts
its constitution, bye-laws and regulations of such a federation and rules of that sport.
This constitutes a contract between the athlete and the concerned federation and thus,
must comply with the terms and conditions by virtue of an institutional affiliation.
This association thus automatically entails compliance with anti-doping provisions by
membership, accreditation or participation in sports events subject to the code. 17

33. It is further submitted that the WADC 18 is the fundamental and universal document
upon which the World Anti-Doping Program in sports is based. The Code applies to
the Olympics and Olympic sports and by virtue of the government’s endorsement of
its objectives, compliance is also sought from national sports authorities. In the
country of Nahira, the National Anti-Doping Agency Rules has formally adopted the
WADC to pursue efforts to eradicate doping. As of 2015, the timeline of occurrence
of the incidence of suspension, the NADA rules embodied the WADC.19

2.2.2 The Punishment imposed upon the athletes are given according to the Rules
enshrined in the NADA Rules, 2015:

34. It is humbly brought to the Hon’ble Court’s attention that Article 2.2.2 of the National
Anti-Doping Agency Rules, 2015 expressly states that the success or failure of the use
or attempted use of a prohibited substance is not material. The athletes have claimed
that the substance called ‘Batavari Shrami Ras’, which was consumed by them on a
regular basis had no effects on the performance of the athletes. It is brought to the
court’s attention that ‘Actoprotectors’ was found in ‘Batavari Shrami Ras’ itself and

16
Rylands v. Fletcher [1868] UKHL 1.
17
Annelize du Pisani, A contractual perspective on the strict liability principle in the World Anti-Doping Code,
DE JURE.
18
World Anti-Doping Code.
19
The Anti-Doping Rules, National Anti-Doping Agency, India (Revised as per 2015 WADA Code).

25 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
as per the NADA Rules, it is immaterial whether it had effects per se upon the athletes
or not. The fact that they have consumed a prohibited and a disbanded drug itself
amounts to Anti-Doping Rule violation.

35. The suspension order stands valid on all grounds and aligns with the very Code
mentioned above. In the case of Alberto Contador, a Spanish cyclist who was
accused of doping and eventually tested positive for Clenbuterol, a substance
20
prohibited under the Code the RFEC concluded that Alberto had no fault or
negligence, which meant a one-year suspension as well as stripping him of the Tour
de France title. This did not go well with WADA which appealed before CAS against
the decision OF REFC. The CAS quashed the decision of REFC, holding that
Contador must be stripped of his title and became ineligible for the standard two-year
period . Therefore, NWB cannot have undermined the WADC or NADA Rules by
administering less than prescribed punishment.

36. The court is made aware of the NADA Rules that mention a provisions for life-time
ban on repeated offenders. Article 10 of the NADA Rules, 2015, which talks about the
sanctioning of the individuals and Article 10.7 states that repeat offenders under
Article 2 must be sanctioned with a lifetime ban. Therefore, the NWB has acted in
consonance with the NADA Rules of 2015 making the suspension order valid and
lawful.

III. THAT THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN CATCHER PVT LTD. AND

NWB, DOES NOT INFRINGES UPON THE RELIABILITY AND
CREDIBILITY OF THE AI GENERATED ANTI-DOPING RESULTS
AND WHETHER SUCH COLLABORATION INFRINGES UPON THE
RIGHTS AND PRINCIPLES SAFEGUARDED UNDER THE LEGAL
FRAMEWORK OF THE STATE OF NAHIRA

37. It is humbly submitted to the apex court of Nahira, that the collaboration of catcher
pvt. Ltd. and NWB is within the statutory framework of legal provisions in the state
of Nahira , without having any material infringement upon the existing legislations of

20
Gordon S. Lynch, Beta-2 Agonists, in PERFORMANCE ENHANCING SUBSTANCES IN SPORT AND
EXERCISE 47, 51 (Michael S. Bahrke & Charles E. Yesalis eds., 2002).

26 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
the state of Nahira. Furthermore , is asserted that the tie-up is both valid and permitted
by law. The AI algorithm is deemed satisfactory as it introduces innovative
technological analysis, culminating in the demonstration of how the AI has effectively
surmounted traditional limitations in doping tests. Consequently, the evidence
generated by this process shall be considered admissible by the lex fori.21

III.1. THE LEGITIMACY OF THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN

CATHER PVT. LTD. AND NWB IS SUBSTANTIATED BY LEGAL
PROVISIONS IN ALL ASPECTS:

38. It must be noted that the collaboration between the Catcher Pvt. Ltd. and NWB was
not a “backdoor” channeling of the two bodies, but a justified alliance for the better
justification of the ongoing cryptic and unjust environmental influences on doping
tests. It is, therefore, far from any confusion, anguish and hesitancy. National
Wrestling Board Affiliated to the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Gov. of India
has a responsibility to uphold the stringent safety measures while at the same time
preserve the essence of the sports.22 Doping remains a significant issue in Indian
sports, affecting the integrity of competitions and athletes' health.
39. The case of Narsingh Yadav v. National Anti-Doping Agency & Ors23is brought to the
court’s attention. This case demonstrates the importance of strict adherence to anti-
doping regulations. Upholding the World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) decision to
ban Narsingh Yadav for testing positive for a banned substance, the Court of
Arbitration for Sport (CAS) emphasized the need for education and awareness among
athletes to prevent doping violations. It becomes even more vital to establish a new
initiative for the disallowance of the drug and such prohibited substances in the
context of sports.

III.1.1. Power of the President of NWB to formulate such Joint Effort:

21
Albert A. Ehrenzweig, The Lex Fori - Basic Rule in the Conflict of Laws, 58 MICH. L. REV. 637 (1960)
22
Mohd. Jafar Iqbal v. Union of India & Ors W.P.(C)-4589/2020
23
Media Release Wrestling (Fs 74kg): Narsingh Yadav Suspended 4 Years Following Successful Appeal By
The World Anti-Doping - Cas Ad Hoc Division Olympic Games Rio 2016

27 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
40. It must be noted that the newly elected president of the NWB, Mr. Orry Naku, owing
to his responsibilities under law24 is obligated to ensure fair and impartial
administration within the Board. In replication to the issues presented, in order for
him to review and reform drug testing policies to obviate any disproportionate
targeting of athletes from categorical ethnic communities, collaboration with a
specialized company such as Catcher Pvt. Ltd. , is justified in its entirity. The Board,
as per the NADA rules, follows a zero-tolerance policy for use of banned substances
to enhancing performance.25

41. The NWB is and have been taking all measures to bring awareness amongst athletes,
coaches and support staff emphasizing the adverse effects of doping. The Federation
is providing updated information viz. list of prohibited substance, doping control
procedures, liaising with NADA for In-Competition and Out of Competition testing,
reinstatement procedure of athletes on whom sanctions are imposed by Anti Doping
Disciplinary Panel of NADA. Looking upon the wrestlers who were caught using
disbanded drugs , it was a credit worthy step for such a collaboration to take place.

III.1.2. The requirement of AI can be denied no further:

42. It is brought to the court’s attention that NWB has entered into such odyssey even in
the past, be it that the NWB acquires ownership rights to Pro Wrestling League 26 or its
contract with Private sports NGO JSW 27, therefore the collaboration with Catcher Pvt.
Ltd. is no novelty. Pertinent to the reality of doping, it was a sorted measure
undertaken by the newly elected president to instill a state-of-the-art drug testing
program.

24
Constitution of the Wrestling Federation of India. art. X
25
AFI Annual Report, Last visited on Feb. 19, 2024
26
Veer Ritesh Soni, WFI acquires ownership rights to Pro Wrestling League, Sportsmintmedia.com (Feb. 19,
2024, 4:06 PM)
27
Sport Star. TheHindu, (last visited Feb. 19, 2024)

28 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
43. The term "state-of-the-art" implies the highest level of development and
advancement in a particular field, whether it's related to technology, procedures,
techniques, or processes28. Therefore the instillation of the state -of-art drug testing
program was with the view to an advanced and cutting-edge system implemented by
the Board. The scrutiny can help ensure transparency and accuracy, benefiting both
the sports industry, regulators, and the wrestlers. This will become more important
with new therapies entering the realm of patient care and the discussions of
abbreviation of post-approval change rigidity to implement new technologies29.

44. It is brought to the court’s kind attention that the advent of artificial intelligence can
make doping checks faster and more efficient 30. Using machine learning methods and
deep learning strategies, the researchers are able to train the system so that it can
consistently identify the typical patterns associated with doping in sport. The system
learns to identify small but characteristic indications of doping, each of which
represents a small piece of the puzzle. There are times when WADA has entered into
AI proficient projects and have solely relied upon this extension of human intelligence
in which specially trained computer algorithms were able to detect other forms of
manipulation beyond those normally associated with conventional doping violations;
one such project was WADA and the Institute of Biochemistry at the German Sport
University Cologne.

III.2. NWB HAS FOLLOWED THE LEGAL REGIME IN EMPLOYING AI

FOR DRUG TESTING:

45. The court must note that various researches have concluded that AI will have an
impact on every stage in clinical trials i.e. from creating a trial design to risk
management, AI-based tools will help along the way 31. In crafting a drug-testing

28
Maik W. Jornitz, Is Your Bioprocess Facility Truly ‘State-Of-The-Art?'
, Bio Process Online (Feb. 19, 2024, 4:14 PM),
https://www.bioprocessonline.com/doc/is-your-bioprocess-facility-truly-state-of-the-art-0001
29
Veer Ritesh Soni, Supra note 19
30
Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz, How-artificial-intelligence-can-help-in-the-fight-
against-doping Last visited Feb. 19,2024.
31
Urtė Fultinavičiūtė, FT Summit: AI and regulatory changes at the forefront of industry’s mind,
Pharmeceutical Technology (Feb. 19, 2024, 4:35 PM),
https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/newsletters/ft-summit-ai-regulatory-changes-health-equity/?cf-
view.

29 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
program, by identifying who or what will trigger the right to be tested and whether the
program requires mandatory random testing, the following aspects are hereby
addressed by the responding counsel:
 The testing procedure, including procedural safeguards; and
 What substances or methods will be tested.

III.2.1. Substances Tested and Methods Used upheld the safeguard for the Wrestlers:

46. Historically, various athletes have experimented with various substances to gain a
competitive edge32. Drugs are classified into twenty fine categories and sub categories
, based on their use and effects, such as opioids, anaesthetics, vitamins, stimulants,
and depressants. Generally, the athletic-based drug-testing inquiry focuses on two
types of drugs:
 performance-enhancing drugs, also known as ergogenic aids, and recreational
"street" drugs or
 psychoactive drugs.

47. Furthermore, in addition to using drugs for the alleged performance-enhancing

qualities, a number of athletes abuse drugs to prevent fatigue, mask pain, cope with
increased stress, etc.33. The ideal or optimal state would be to elaborate on the new
facility’s attributes, therefore the influx of AI. Catcher Pvt. Ltd. with an expertise in
drug testing and anti-doping measures, rightly utilised AI for the generation of the
drug testing. Not only was the system algorithm used by the AI took input of
multitude of data and samples to work with and give a result but also had an
attribution to real life behavioural examination.

III.3. MODULAR METHODS OF DETECTION AND COMBATING THE

TRADITIONAL LIMITATIONS USED BY THE CATCHER PVT. LTD:

48. The counsel for respondents humbly submits that the pertinent limitation of the
traditional or the historic drug testing , starting with the "Clearance time" to false
32
e EDWARD F. DOLAN, DRUGS IN SPORTS 17 (2d ed. 1992).
33
Charles Feeney Knapp, Drug-testing and the Student-Athlete: Meeting the Constitutional Challenge, 76 IowA
L. REv. 107, 112 (1990).

30 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
positives threatens potential indulgence in the use of prohibited substances by
athletes. However, if the drug test is not administered within a specific timeframe
following their usage, the test result will be negative. Drug-testing methodologies
encompass breathalyzer testing, hair (radioimmunoassay) testing, saliva testing,
urinalysis testing, blood testing, or the utilisation of endocrine profiles etc.34

49. It should be noted, however, that even the GC/MS method has its limitations, as it can
detect only for substances programmed into it. Additionally, the sanctity of the chain
of custody must be maintained. It becomes highly volatile to ensure these checks and
balances , and are susceptible to interference by the human interventions. 35 Pertaining
to these drawbacks, AI is the next best course of action for any sporting facility.

III.3.1. AI drug testing overcomes the limitations of traditional methods:

50. The aforementioned limitations have a highly efficient solution , The utilisation of the
presented AI in drug testing, has been the one which can even detect when the
samples of one individual has been switched. This type of fraud, which involves
swapping a ‘dirty’ urine sample from a doped athlete for a ‘clean’ one, is extremely
difficult for doping investigators to detect and relies on complex lab analyses. When a
deep-learning training strategy is adopted, the AI model is able to recognize the
typical patterns in this type of manipulation.

51. The traditional drug testing is also unable to test standard performance-enhancing
drugs (such as anabolic-androgenic steroids), because it concentrates on the
identification of the use of recreational drugs or alcohol. AI goes beyond the boundary
line of such limitations.

III.4. LEGAL PROVISIONS TOWARDS THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

RESULT GENERATED BY THE COMPUTER BASED SYSTEM I.E.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ALGORITHM:

34
Claude Bennett et al. Eds., 2 CECIL BOOK OF MEDICINE 1201 ( 19th ed. 1992).
35
KEN LISKA, THE PHARMACIST'S GUIDE TO THE MOST MISUSED & ABUSED DRUGS (1988)

31 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
52. It is brought to the court’s attention that as per the § 45, § 79, & § 65B of the Indian
Evidence Act36 , § 4 of the IT Act the concept of electronic record is introduced and
by virtue of § 92 of the IT Act, The Indian Evidence Act was amended to include
“electronic record”, thereby allowing for admissibility of the digital evidence. § 65B
deals with admissibility of electronic evidence.

53. Furthermore, the case of State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu @ Afzal Guru37, held
that secondary digital evidence could be adduced under other § of the Indian Evidence
Act, mainly § 63 and § 65 of the Act according to sub-§
(1) electronic records which are printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in
optical or magnetic media produced by a computer shall be also deemed to be a
document if the conditions mentioned in this sub-§
(2) are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be
admissible in any proceedings.
The above conditions are to create a two-fold impact, firstly, to restrict and ensure the
unauthorized use of data and secondly to confirm that the device was functioning
properly so that the accuracy and genuineness of the reproduced data is maintained.
54. According to § 65B sub-§ (3) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 if the user uses a
networked device for storing or processing information, all the devices in the same
network would be considered as a single device. Sub-§ (4) provides for a certificate of
authenticity to be provided by a competent authority for the purpose of proof
checking and authentication of the compliance to be maintained in the preceding sub
§.

3.4.1. Defining Digital Evidence with reference to AI-generated report:

55. It is brought to the courts kind attention that according to the council of Europe as
“Digital evidence any evidence obtained from data contained in or created by any
device, the operation of which depends on software or data stored or transmitted

36
Opinions of experts.––When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science, or art,
or as to identity of handwriting 2 [or finger impressions], the opinions upon that point of persons specially
skilled in such foreign law, science or art, 3 [or in questions as to identity of handwriting] 2 [or finger
impressions] are relevant facts.
37
State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600.

32 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
through a computer system or network38”. The AI generated report, in the present
matter fulfils the following essentials :

 the electronic evidence must be legally obtained based on written permission from
the competent investigation authorities;
 it must be verified as valid by computer science and information technology
experts39”
This can be rephrased as two key principles, authenticity, and accountability. The data
which was used by the AI was provided by the NWB and behavioral examinations of
the athletes during their performances.

56. The acceptance of digital evidence in India can be seen through the admissibility of
emails, call records40, hard disks41, statements of accounts42 and more. “…... The
reason is because it can take years to get new rules enacted and technology changes
so fast and is used so quickly that it outstrips the ability of courts to be able to
assimilate how legal principles —which change in very small increments — deal with
it..”43

57. The counsel humbly submits in conclusion that when analysing the admissibility of
AI evidence, we cannot afford to approach artificial intelligence without genuine
reliability on the evidence produced and the methodology that can be used to provide
a sufficient foundation for validity and reliability, which entails “borrowing” from
rules of evidence that deal with standards for admitting scientific, technical, will assist
the court in demonstrating that the AI evidence was produced by a system that
produces reliable results is infallible proof and escapes the realm of preponderance of
probability. Therefore, the validity of AI-generated report on doping cannot be
challenged on grounds of discrimination or principles of equality and the hence, the
order of Hon’ble Hight court of Zahura must be upheld.

38
Council of Europe, Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on electronic evidence
in civil and administrative proceedings Last visited Feb. 19, 2024
39
Moussa, A.F. Electronic evidence and its authenticity in forensic evidence. Egypt J Forensic Sci 11, 20
(2021).
40
State (NCT of Delhi) v Navjot Sandhu (2005) 11 SCC 600.
41
Dharambir v Central Bureau of Investigation 2008 SCC 336.
42
Om Prakash v Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), 2017 SCC 10249.
43
Cornell Law School, Last visited Feb. 19, 2024.

33 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024

PRAYER

Wherefore in the lights of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is
humbly requested that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to adjudge and declare:

1. To DISMISS the Appeal and DECLARE that fundamental rights of Bolam

Community have not been violated.
2. To UPHOLD the suspension of Appellant no. 1.

34 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS
 JUSTICE N. SANTOSH HEGDE NATIONAL MOOT COURT
COMPETITION, 2024
3. To UPHOLD the order of Hon’ble High Court of Zahura against Appellant No. 2 as
Valid.
4. To AFFIRM the report produced by Catcher Pvt. Ltd. via the AI Algorithm.

And/Or
Pass any such order, or direction as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, in the
interest of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience. And, for this the Respondents as in
duty bound, shall humbly pray.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

C OUNSEL FOR THE

RESPONDENTS

35 | P a g e
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS