Page|

H.P. COLLEGE OF LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2023-2024

BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

IN THE MATTER OF

SONIA..............................................................................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.........................................................RESPONDENT

CRIMINAL APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT

UNDER SECTION 374 (II) OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE

 Page|

H.P. COLLEGE OF LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION

FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2023-2024

SUBMITTED BY :

PRASHANT VASUDEVA

L. LB. 6TH Semester

Roll No. - 210111360057

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE

 Page|

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS…........................................................................................................................................ 3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…..................................................................................................................................5

STATEMENT OF FACTS......................................................................................................................................... 7

ISSUES RAISED…..................................................................................................................................................... 8

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…............................................................................................................................9

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED….................................................................................................................................10

1. WHETHER THE PROVOCATION WAS VALID?...........................................................................................10

2. WHETHER SONIA COMMITTED CULPABLE HOMICIDE OR MURDER?.................................................10

3. WHETHER SONIA HAS ACTED IN INVOLUNTARILY INTOXICATION OR PRIVATE DEFENCE OR

NOT??
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11S

PRAYER….................................................................................................................................................................. 12

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE

 Page|5

MOOT PREPOSITION

In the matter between Sonia and Aman, who were married for five years, it is noted
X

that Aman, over the past three years, has developed a habit of excessive drinking and
returning home late at night. Despite Sonia's frequent scolding and warnings of
leaving him if he didn't change his behavior, Aman's actions persisted. It is also
evident that Aman displayed violent behavior, including physical assault on Sonia
and coercing her into unwanted sexual activity. Upon seeking counsel, Sonia was
advised to leave Aman due to the severity of the situation. When Aman returned
home intoxicated one evening and Sonia informed him of her decision to leave the
next day, he responded with violence, causing significant harm to her. Subsequently,
while Aman was asleep, Sonia, overwhelmed by the situation, took drastic action.
She retrieved a hammer from the tool shed and fatally struck Aman in the head.
Following this event, Sonia promptly contacted the authorities, admitting to the act
of killing her husband. During her subsequent questioning, Sonia reiterated her
inability to endure further abuse, having previously communicated her intentions to
the counselor. Despite these circumstances, Sonia was charged with murder,
prompting her to appeal the verdict. It is contended that the trial judge failed to
consider the defense of provocation, purportedly due to a perceived cooling-off
period between the provoking incident and Sonia's actions.
JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJSAD

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

5
 Page|6

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

ARTICLES
REFERRED
1. Nidhi Pandey, Whether the Defence of Grave and Sudden Provocation be Applied in
the Cases of Prolonged Provocation, SCC ONLINE BLOG (2022).

CASES REFERRED

1. Ajai Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 30 August, 2001, 2002CRILJ3704

2. R v. Duffy (1949) 33 Cr App R 71
3. State of Maharashtra v. Vijay and Ors (2010) 10 SCC 815
4. State of Punjab v. Iqbal Singh (2011) 11 SCC 343:
5. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Mst. Sanjana Alias Sanju (1986) 2 SCC 608:
6. R v. Ahluwalia (1992) 4 All ER 889
7. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar (2012) 4 SCC 431
8. State of Haryana v. Jagdish (2016) 2 SCC 522.

STATUTES
REFERRED
1. Indian Penal code,1860.
2. Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

BOOKS REFERRED

1. All India Reporter.

2. Criminal Law Journal.
3. Supreme Court Cases.

ONLINE SOURCES

1. SCC Online, https://www.scconline.com/.

2. Indian Kanoon, https://indiankanoon.org/.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

6
 Page|7

INTRODUCTION

May it please your Lordships,

The appellant, Sonia, seeks justice in the matter between herself and the State of Himachal
Pradesh. We respectfully submit this memorial/appeal u/s 374 (II) of Code of Criminal
Procedure against the judgment of the Trial Court, wherein Sonia was convicted of Murder
u/s 302 of Indian Penal Code.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

7
 Page|8

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Sonia and Aman were married for five years.

2. Over the past three years, Aman developed a habit of excessive drinking and returning home late
at night.

3. Despite Sonia's warnings and scolding, Aman's actions persisted, accompanied by violent
behavior towards Sonia including physical assault on Sonia and coercing her into unwanted sexual
activity.

4. Seeking counsel due to the severity of the situation, Sonia was advised to leave Aman.

5. When Sonia informed Aman of her decision to leave, he responded with violence, causing
significant harm to her.

6. Overwhelmed by the situation and fearing further abuse, Sonia took drastic action, fatally
striking Aman in the head while he was asleep.

7. Sonia promptly contacted the authorities, admitting to the act of killing her husband.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

8
 Page|9

ISSUES RAISED

I. Whether the provocation was valid?

II. Whether Sonia committed culpable homicide or murder?

III. Whether Sonia has acted in involuntarily intoxication or private defense or not?

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

9
 P a g e | 10

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Whether the Provocation was valid?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that according to the facts of the preposition,
Aman's persistent abusive behavior towards Sonia, including excessive drinking, late-night
returns, physical assault, and coercive actions, created a hostile environment within their
marriage. This continuous pattern of behavior constitutes ongoing provocation, as recognized
under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.

When Sonia finally decided to leave and informed Aman of her decision, his violent response
resulting in significant harm to her underscores the severity of the provocation she faced.

2. Whether Sonia committed Culpable Homicide or murder ?

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that it can be implied according to the facts
that Sonia's emotional distress, compounded by Aman's violence and the imminent threat to
her safety, ignited a "heat of passion" that led to her actions, aligning with the criteria laid
down in Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.

3. Whether Sonia has acted in involuntarily intoxication or private defence or not?

It is humbly submitted that Sonia's actions were influenced by emotional distress rather than
premeditation, aligning with the principles of involuntary intoxication.

As per the facts of the preposition, Sonia's actions were an act of self-defense against the continuous
violent behavior perpetrated by Aman. Aman's pattern of physical assault on Sonia and coercive
actions, including unwanted sexual activity, created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. When
Sonia finally gathered the courage to inform Aman of her decision to leave, he responded with
escalated violence, causing significant harm to her. In this context, Sonia's actions were a reasonable
response to the immediate threat to her safety and well-being, justifying her use of force to protect
herself.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

10
 P a g e | 11

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. WHETHER THE PROVOCATION WAS VALID?

It is the cumulative effect of Aman's behavior on Sonia's mental state and determines that it
constituted sufficient provocation to mitigate her culpability for the act of killing her husband.

That the trial judge erred in failing to adequately consider the defense of provocation,
particularly in light of Sonia's circumstances and the cumulative effect of Aman's actions on her
mental state.Sonia's actions were a direct response to the provocation she endured, rather than a
premeditated act of murder.

Aman's excessive drinking, late-night returns, physical assaults, and coercive behavior
constituted ongoing provocation that created an intolerable environment for Sonia. Despite her
repeated warnings and attempts to address the situation, Aman's actions persisted, escalating to
the point where Sonia felt compelled to leave for her own safety.

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that according to the facts of the preposition,
Aman's persistent abusive behavior towards Sonia, including excessive drinking, late-night
returns, physical assault, and coercive actions, created a hostile environment within their
marriage. This continuous pattern of behavior constitutes ongoing provocation, as recognized
under Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.
When Sonia finally decided to leave and informed Aman of her decision, his violent response
resulting in significant harm to her underscores the severity of the provocation she faced.

2. WHETHER SONIA COMMITTED CULPABLE HOMICIDE OR MURDER?

It is humbly stated that as per the facts of the preposition, Sonia's actions were not premeditated;
rather, they were a direct response to the imminent threat of further harm posed by Aman's
violent behavior. Therefore, her actions should be classified as culpable homicide, as there was
no intention or knowledge to cause death.

Sonia's emotional distress, compounded by Aman's violence and the imminent threat to her
safety, ignited a "heat of passion" that led to her actions, aligning with the criteria laid down in
Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.

Exception 4.—Culpable homicide is not murder if it is committed without premeditation in a

sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender's having taken
undue advantage or acted in a cruel or unusual manner.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

11
 P a g e | 12

3. WHETHER SONIA HAS ACTED IN INVOLUNTARILY INTOXICATION OR PRIVATE DEFENCE OR NOT??

It is humbly submitted that as per the facts of preposition, Sonia's decision to leave Aman was
borne out of a genuine concern for her safety, a concern that was tragically validated by Aman's
violent response. Aman's history of physical assault and coercive behavior left Sonia in a
perpetual state of vulnerability, prompting her to take decisive action to protect herself from
further harm. When confronted with Aman's menacing behavior on the night of the incident,
Sonia's instinct for self-preservation kicked in, compelling her to defend herself against an
imminent threat to her life.
Private defense is predicated on the fundamental right of individuals to protect themselves from
harm, even if it entails the use of force. Sonia's actions, including her retrieval of the hammer,
were driven by a primal instinct to survive in the face of overwhelming danger. It is essential to
recognize that Sonia's response was not an act of aggression but rather a desperate bid for self-
preservation in the midst of a life-threatening situation.

Sonia's state of mind at the time of the incident must be carefully examined. She acted in a state
of extreme distress and fear, driven by the urgent need to protect herself from further abuse. Her
actions may also be justified under the principle of private defense, as she had a reasonable belief
that her life was in imminent danger.

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

12
 P a g e | 13

PRAYER

Prayer for Relief under Exception 4 of Section 300

Considering the circumstances of the case, we respectfully pray for the following relief under
Exception 4 of Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code:

That the conviction of Sonia for murder be reconsidered under Exception 4 of Section 300 of the
Indian Penal Code as Sonia's actions were influenced by emotional distress rather than
premeditation.

That Sonia be sentenced accordingly, taking into account the mitigating factors of provocation,
fear for her safety, and the cumulative effect of years of abuse suffered at the hands of Aman.
Sonia’s emotional state and mental health were impacted due to continuous provocation, which
should be taken into account in assessing her culpability.

That Sonia be granted any other relief deemed just and equitable by this Honorable Court.

And/or
Pass any other order it may deem fit, in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good
Conscience All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

****

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT

13