III Amnmc Moot Court Proposition
III Amnmc Moot Court Proposition
III Amnmc Moot Court Proposition
rape mercilessly done. Shri Shyamlal who had drawn Spot map (PW-6)
was examined. They further stated that gang rape by the 4 accused had
dehumanizing effect on the victim. The witnesses were cross examined
and stood to the testimony.
5(i) Shri Tribuvan accused claimed that he is a minor. He produced
his horoscope, birth certificate and matriculation certificate wherein he
was found as having completed 17 years and 10 months on the date of
event. As per Medical Certificate he was declared above 18 years and
was found indulging in sex and drugs. He confessed that with the
assistance of Bhanwarlal on payment of Rs. 5,000/- to Bhanwarlal and
Rs. 50,000/- to one other student of the Hostel, he had carried other
student to a five star hotel for the whole night. He also stated that he
had been frequently visiting the Hostel with the permission of the
Warden and that he spotted the Complainant in mini skirt (western
dress) with high heels, cosmetics and was allured of her charming
personality. He asked Bhanwar Lal to manage the Complainant on
payment of Rs. 10,000/- for him and Rs. 50,000/- for the Complainant.
He smilingly stated that he had inter-course with the complainant
gracefully, she was in proper senses and co-operative. She was misused
by other accused. He be declared as minor.
(ii)
Shri Mohan claimed that he was out of the town, came to
his house at about 11.00 P.M. and had not gone to the room of
Bhanwarlal. He denied the charge. However, the Motor bike registered
in his name was found in the compound. He failed to prove his denial.
(iii)
Shri Sohan corroborated the rape story but claimed that he
was persuaded by Tribhuvan to have forcible inter-course for his
pleasure. Shri Tribhuvan was watching the action and laughing.
(iv)
Shri Bhanwarlal confessed guilty but stated that he had to
co-operate and plan as Tribhuvan gave him Rs. 10,000/- and also
persuaded for forcible rape. He had been arranging drinks party earlier
also. He admitted receipt of Rs. 10,000/- for him and Rs. 50,000/- for
the Complainant. He told that he earlier gave offer to the complainant,
but she categorically refused to succumb to his offer for Tribhuvan, a
well built person with charming personality and lot of fortune.
6.
The Sessions Judge, Jaipur by judgment dated 30.05.2015
convicted the three accused after holding that the prosecution has
proved its case fully supported by independent witnesses and medical
evidence on record apart from the Sperm Detection Test stained clothes,
mattress with blood, drugs, intoxicants, cash, medical tests, etc. The
Sessions Judge Court considering the defence evidence convicted the
accused as follows :(i)
Shri Bhawar
imprisonment for life;
Lal,
Chowkidar
to
undergo
rigorous
each and on
6.1. The Sessions Judge further observed that the physical scar may
heal up, but the mental scar will always remain. When a woman is
ravished, what is inflicted is not merely physical injury but a deep sense
of some deathless shame. He also stated that on the facts and given
circumstances in each case, the nature of the crime, the manner in
which it was planned and committed, the motive for commission of the
crime, the conduct of the accuseds, the nature of weapon used and all
other attending circumstances are relevant and material facts, which
would enter into the area of consideration and it will be a mockery of
justice to permit these accused to escape the extreme penalty of law
when faced with such evidence and such cruel acts. To give the lesser
punishment for the accuseds would be to render the justicing system of
this country suspect. The common man will lose faith in courts. The
nature and gravity of the crime, which are germane for consideration of
appropriate punishment in a criminal trial stand established beyond
doubt. The court will be failing in its duty if severe punishment is not
awarded for a crime which has been committed not only against the
individual victim but also against the society to which the criminal and
victim belong. The punishment to be awarded for a crime must not be
irrelevant but it should conform to and be consistent with the atrocity
and brutality with which the crime has been perpetrated, the enormity
of the crime warranting public abhorrence and it should respond to the
societys cry for justice against the criminal. If for an extremely heinous
crime perpetrated in a very brutal and planner manner, the most
deterrent punishment is not given, the case of deterrent punishment will
lose its relevance. Rape is not only a crime against the person of a
woman, but a crime against the entire society. It indelibly leaves a scar
on the most cherished possession of a woman i.e. her dignity, honour,
reputation and not the least her chastity. It destroys, as noted by the
Honble Supreme Court in Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Subhra Chakraborty
(1966) 1-SCC-490 : (AIR 1996 SC 922) the entire psychology of a woman
pushes her into deep emotional crisis. It is a crime against basic human
rights, and is also violative of the victims most cherished of the
fundamental rights, namely, the right to life contained in Article 21 of
the Constitution. The Courts are, therefore, expected to deal with cases
of sexual crime against women with utmost sensitivity. Such cases need
to be dealt with sternly and severely.
7.
Aggrieved by the said judgement, the respondents accused as well
as the complainant preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 5 8/2015 before the Honble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at
Jaipur Bench. The Honble High Court by impugned judgment dated
20.8.2015 came to the conclusion that the Sessions Court was justified
in coming to the conclusion that the four accused have committed the
heinous act, offence of gang rape against the student of the hostel, which
would have life long effect on the body and mind of the complainant.
However, taking a lenient view of the matter, on appreciation of defence
evidence and non-availability of any independent eye witness, reduced
the sentence awarded by the Sessions Court to the following period :-
years;
(i)
(ii) Shri Mohan to undergo simple imprisonment for five years; and
(iii) Shri Sohan to the period already undergone by the accused.
(iv)
Shri Tribhuvan was held as minor and to be dealt with inaccordance with law.
The appeal of the accused were allowed in above
terms and appeal of the complainant to enhance sentence and damages
was dismissed, being bereft of any substance.
8.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the complainant as well as
the accused, Bhawar Lal, Mohan and Sohan have filed appeals before the
Honble Supreme Court. The Honble Supreme Court has issued notices
confining to the issues raised in the appeals. The Supreme Court also
issued notice as to why the sentence awarded by the High Court to the
three accused respondents be not restored to that of the sentence
awarded by the Sessions Court and why the accused Bhawar Lal not to
undergo life imprisonment for whole of the convicts life (not for 20 years
or 14 years) ? Notice was also issued to Tribhuvan, who had become
major on the date of the impugned orders of the trial Court & High
Court.
9.
All the appeals have been consolidated and are fixed for final
hearing in October, 2015, with appropriate directions to submit written
memorials on or before 30.9.2015.
RELEVANT LAW
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sections 45, 363, 375 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2000.
Evidence Act.
Section 357 and 357A of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Constitution of India;
Narcotic Drugs Act; and
Other relevant Acts.