3rd INDRAPRASTHA NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2014

3rd INDRAPRASTHA NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2014

TeamCode: 14

IN THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AT NEW DELHI, INDIA

Petition filed under Article 136Of the Constitution ofIndia

SLP ( Cr.)NO./2012

MR. AMIT SHARMApetitioner

Vs.

STATE OF DELHI.Respondent

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHE PETITIONER

Most Respectfully Submitted to the Honble Chief Justice of India & other Companion Judges of the Honble Supreme Court of India

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSINDEX OF AUTHORITIESA. CASESB. STATUTESC. BOOKS AND OTHER AUTHORITIESSTATEMENT OF JURISDICTIONSTATEMENT OF FACTSTATEMENT OF ISSUESSUMMARY OF ARGUMENTSARGUMENT ADVANCED

1) Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the fundamental rights of accused?Violation of article 21Violation of right to live with human dignityViolation of right to privacyViolation of right to speedy trial2) Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the natural justice principle or amounting to gross injustice?Violation of criminal natural justice principle 3) Whether it is the need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of firs?

4) Whether mr. amit sharma is liable for offence of conspiracy?

No agreementCircumstantial evidence is unreliableThe prosecution unable to prove the guilty beyond reasonable doubtMens rea and actus reus is absentAbsence of requisite mens rea5) Whether mr. amit sharma is liable for offence of fraud?There is no actus reus on the part of the accusedThere alleged fraudulent representation cannot be attributed to accused6) Whether Mr. Amit sharma is liable for offence of cheating?False or misleading representationFraudulent or dishonest inducement of personIntention to defraud is absentNo mens rea as to circumstancesNo coincidence between actus reus and mens rea

PRAYER

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

AIRAll India Reporter

AllAllahabad High Court

CalCalcutta High Court

Cri LJ / Cr LJCriminal Law Journal

Cr.P.C.Code of Criminal Procedure

DelDelhi High Court

DWDefence Witness

Ed.Edition

GujGujarat High Court

IPCIndian Penal Code

ICIndian Cases

MadMadras High Court

n.Foot Note no.

OriOrissa High Court

p.Page No.

P&HPunjab and Haryana High Court

PatPatna High Court

DelDelhi high court

RajRajasthan High Court

SCSupreme Court

SCCSupreme Court Cases

SCJSupreme Court Journal

SCRSupreme Court Reporter

Sec.Section

v.Versus

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

A. CASES1) Railway board v. chandrima das (2000) 2SCC 4652) Kishore Singh Ravinder Dev v. State of Rajasthan,3) Meneka Gandhi (Smt.) v. Union of India4) Francis coralie v. union territory of delhi AIR 1994 SC 18445) M.Nagaraj v. union of india, (2006) 8 SCC 2126) Kartar singh v. state of Punjab7) State of W.B v. committee for protection of democratic rights (2010) 3 SCC 5718) State of Punjab v. baldev sing AIR 1999 SC 23789) Directorate of revenue v. mohdnisarholia (2008) 2 SCC 37010) Hussainarakhatoon v. home secretary, state of bihar, AIR 1979 SC 136011) Amitbhaianil Chandra shah v. CBI (2013) 6 SCC 34812) R v. Local Government Board, ex p Arlidge13) T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala &Ors. (2001) 6 SCC18114) Mohan Lalv. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1974 SC15) JanarLal Das v. State of Orissa, 1991 (3) SCC 27;16) Jayaram and An r. v. State of AP, AIR 1995 SC 2128.17) Jayaram and An r. v. State of AP, AIR 1995 SC 2128.18) Mahmoodv. State of UP AIR 1976 SC 6919) Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 33720) Ningawwa v ByrappaShiddappaHirekurabar, AIR 1968 S.C. 95621) MuktilalAgarwal v trustees of the P.F. A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 33622) Hedley Byrne and Co. Ltd. V Heller and Partners (1964) A.C. 49523) Indian oil corpn. V. NEPC india Ltd. (2006) 3 SCC (cri) 188

B) WEBSITES:

1. http://www.findlaw.com

2. http://www.judis.nic.in

3. http://www.manupatra.co.in/AdvancedLegalSearch.aspx

4. http://www.scconline.com

C) STATUTES1. Constitution of India2. Code of criminal procedure, 19733. Indian evidence Act, 1872D) BOOKS AND OTHER AUTHORITES1) Gaur, KD, Criminal Law: Cases and Materials, (6th Ed. 2009) 2) Gupte and Dighe, Criminal Manual, (7th Ed. 2007) 3) Harris, Criminal Law, (22nd Ed. 2000) 4) Hill, McGraw, Criminal Investigation, (4th Ed. 2004) 5) I, III, IV Nelson R. A. Indian Penal Code, 10th Ed. (2008) 6) I, Kathuria, R.P. Supreme Court on Criminal Law, 1950-2002, ( 6th Ed. 2002)7) II, Mitra, B.B., Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (20th ed. 2006) 8) II, Nandi, Criminal Ready Referencer, ( 2nd Ed. 2007) 9) II, PrincepsCommentary on the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (18th ed. 2005) 10) III, Sarvaria, SK, Indian Penal Code, (10th Ed. 2008) 11) Kelkar, R.V. Criminal Procedure, (5th Ed. 2011) 12) Lal, Batuk, The Law of Evidence, (18th Ed. 2010) 13) Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Indian Penal Code, 33rd Ed. (2011) 14) Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Law of Evidence, 22nd Ed. (2006) 15) Varshi, H.P. Criminal Trial and Judgment, (3rd ed. 1981) 16) Tyagi, SurendraPrakash, Criminal Trial (2nd ed. 1996) 17) D.D Bashu,Commentry On the constitution of India 5576(8th ed. , 2007)18) M.P Jain, Indian constitution law 235 (5th ed. 2009)

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE APPELLANTS HAVE APPROACHED THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. LEAVE HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THIS HONBLE COURT AND THE MATTER HAS NOW BEEN POSTED FOR FINAL HEARING. ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READS AS HEREUNDER:

136. SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL BY THE SUPREME COURT.

(1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING IN THIS CHAPTER, THE SUPREME COURT MAY, IN ITS DISCRETION,GRANT SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM ANY JUDGMENT, DECREE, DETERMINATION, SENTENCE OR ORDER IN ANY CAUSE OR MATTER PASSED OR MADE BY ANY COURT OR TRIBUNAL IN THE TERRITORY OFINDIA.

(2) NOTHING IN CLAUSE (1) SHALL APPLY TO ANY JUDGMENT, DETERMINATION, SENTENCE OR ORDER PASSED OR MADE BY ANY COURT OR TRIBUNAL CONSTITUTED BY OR UNDER ANY LAW RELATING TO THEARMED FORCES.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

History and backgroundMr. Amit Sharma, aged 34 years, is a brilliant investment banker. He lives in Mumbai with his wife, a housewife, and 2 minor children aged 7 years and 9 years respectively along with his mother aged 70 years. He is working as the managing director at a reputed Tarcorp company. During official travels he often came across highly influential businessmen, politicians, bankers, as well as local regional leaders and many self-styled godmen.Meet baba mataji During one such travel he met one Baba Mataji, a Godman who claimed to be blessed by a particular deity and claimed to have possessed her powers. Mr Sharma started to discuss his business dealings with Baba Mataji in order to gain insights and predictions about the actions of his rivals. In a show of love and affection, Baba Mataji has revealed to Mr Sharma one of his biggest secret the power to triplicate money in a matter of days by chanting mantras.Convinced with babajiBaba mataji asked Mr. Sharma for lump sum of Rs. 1 lakhs to demonstrate the power. Although Mr Sharma was a bit sceptical of this new power he gave the money and was convinced when baba converted his Rs. 1 lac to Rs. 3 lac just in day.Recommend to other personLater on Mr. Sharma began to publicly vouch for apparent power of Baba Mataji and on his persuasion began to recommend him to his acquaintances which consisted of the highly influential businessman, politicians, bankers, as well as local regional leaders. He impressed upon them the magnitude of the power of Baba, especially the one for triplicate the money and started collecting money from them in order that they too benefit from Baba. Hundreds of people all over India on the faith of representations of Mr. Sharma gave large amount of money to him.Large scale ceremony as once-in-lifetimeAfter the period of 4 months Baba Mataji impressed upon Mr. Sharma of his desire to perform a large scale ceremony wherein he would multiply the given money 7 times. Baba Mataji wanted to increase their wealth, so he started convincing the people. Accordingly he asked Mr. Sharma to label the ceremony as once in lifetime chance and demands sums from the people on his name. Accordingly Mr. Sharma travelled length and breadth of India and collected money. Baba mataji vacant with large moneyPeople all over india gave huge sums of money to mr. Sharma. Some people even gave up their life savings, so that they may benefit from Baba. Mr. Sharma accordingly collected money from 1897 people in India amounting Rs. 150 crores and gave it to Baba.After 21 days Mr Sharma deposited the money with Baba. He was intimated by his bank in Mumbai that Rs. 25 crores have been credited to his account. Mr Sharma went to Baba for the collection of money for disbursal. Upon his arrival he found the residence of Baba vacant and the money missing, even nobody knew where the Baba was. Mr Sharma believed that Baba had miraculously managed to credit the money to the people to whom it was so owed and went back home.First FIR FiledAfter 14 days Mr Sharma received the first phone call from one of investors who demanded the status of the money. Mr Sharma denied having the knowledge of the money or of Baba. Soon the word of the missing Baba and money.Mr Sharma was swamped with calls all over India. Two days later, many FIRs was filed against Mr Sharma and Baba Mataji alleging fraud, conspiracy and cheating, at Mysore and Karnataka. Soon FIRS all over India were lodged against Mr Sharma and Baba on same or similar grounds. In total, to this date, 1774 FIRs lodged against them in India.Took cognizance

The Dwarka district court, Delhi on a police report filed in a FIR against Mr Sharma and baba mataji in its local jurisdiction, took cognizance of the offence in the charge sheet and accordingly issued warrants of arrest against Mr Sharma and baba mataji.DisputeThe DCP (EOW) stated in his affidavit that the in such cases was a club the multiple FIRs into one single FIR as the offence all formed a part and parcel of the same transaction viz. the accused duping the public at large but Dwarka district court, Delhi disagreed with the reason of the DCP. There was a great deal of inconsistency between the law as is, the law laid down by the Honble supreme court of India and the practice of the police in such cases.Special leave petitionMrSharma , immediately filed a special leave petition in the supreme court praying that the Honble court maybe pleased to consolidate and club all the cases against him in one single trial.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE

1) WHETHER THE ACT OF DENIAL THE CLUBBING OF CASES AMOUNTING TO INFRINGEMENT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF ACCUSED?2) WHETHER THE ACT OF DENIAL THE CLUBBING OF CASES AMOUNTING TO INFRINGEMENT OF THE NATURAL JUSTICE PRINCIPLE OR AMOUNTING TO GROSS INJUSTICE?3) WHETHER IT IS THE NEED OF HOUR TO COME WITH AND ACCURATE LEGISLATION REGARDING CLUBBING OF FIRS?4) WHETHER MR. AMIT SHARMA IS LIABLE FOR OFFENCE OF CONSPIRACY?5) WHETHER MR. AMIT SHARMA IS LIABLE FOR OFFENCE OF FRAUD?6) WHETHER MR. AMIT SHARMA IS LIABLE FOR OFFENCE OF CHEATING?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1) Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the fundamental rights of accused?It is humbly submitted before this Honble court that the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the basic and fundamental rights of accused which lead to injustice with the accused.2) Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the natural justice principle or amounting to gross injustice?It is humbly that accused had faced multiplicity of legal proceeding against him in all over India which violate the procedural fairness and principle of natural justice. There is uncertainty in the position of law regarding clubbing FIRs leads to violation of principle of natural justice.Therefore, It is humbly request to this Honble court to quashing the other FIR to meet the ends of justice.3) Whether it is the need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of FIRs? It is humbly submitted before this Honble court that in the matter, all FIR was club into a single FIRs as the offence all formed a part and parcel of the same transaction viz. the accused duping the public at large. Thus it is need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of FIR.4) Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of conspiracy?It is humbly submitted that accused does not committed such offence of conspiracy on the following ground:-i. No agreementii. Circumstantial evidence is unreliableiii. The allegation is fallacious as mens rea and actus reus is absentiv. Absence of requisite mens rea

5) Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of fraud?It is humbly submitted that Accused did not false representation knowingly. He did not know about the truth and believed that baba mataji has power to triplicate money even though mr.sharma was a bit skeptical of this new power he gave the money and was convinced when baba converted his 1 lac to 3 lac just in days . Therefore, it is humbly submitted that accused did not commit such offence

6) Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of cheating?It is humbly submitted that accused did not false or mislead representation and prosecution was unable to prove of intention of defraud.

Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the fundamental rights of accused?

Our constitution guarantees all the basic and fundamental human rights set out in the universal declaration of human rights, 1948, to its citizens and other persons. The chapter dealing with the fundamental rights is contained in part-III of the constitution. The purpose of part-III is to safeguard the basic human rights from the vicissitudes of political controversy and to place them beyond the reach of the political parties who, by virtue of their majority, may come to form the government at the center or in the state.The fundamental rights are available to all the citizens of the country but a few of them are also available to persons. The word life has also been used prominently in the universal declaration of human rights, 1948. The fundamental rights under the constitution almost in consonance with the right contained in the universal declaration of human rights as also the declaration and the covenants of civil and political rights and the covenants of economic , social and cultural rights, to which India is party having ratified them. They also have a right to life in this country. Thus they also have the right to live, so long as they are here, with human dignity. Just as the state is under an obligation to protect the life of every citizen in this country, so also the state is under an obligation to protect the life of the persons who are not citizens[footnoteRef:1]. [1: Railway board v. chandrima das (2000) 2SCC 465]

Therefore, accused is citizen of India and he is entitled for the protection against fundamental rights.

The preamble of the Indian constitution emphasizes on the unity and integrity of the nation as also on the dignity of the individual[footnoteRef:2]. [2: Santoshmehandev, dynamics of indianconstitution , constitution of indian-in precept and practice, pp. 126-127( edited by C.K jain, secretary general , loksabha secretariat.)]

Violation of article 21

Article 21[footnoteRef:3]reads, no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Article 21 of the Indian constitution envisages a right to life with human dignity. The word life under art. 21 means quality of life[footnoteRef:4] which includes the right to live with human dignity. In the leading case of Kishore Singh RavinderDev v. State of Rajasthan, it was said that the laws of India i.e. Constitutional, Evidentiary and procedural have made elaborate provisions for safeguarding the rights of the accused with the view to protect his (accused) dignity as a human being and giving him benefits of a just, fair and impartial trail. However, in another leading case of Meneka Gandhi (Smt.) v. Union of India it was interpreted that the procedure adopted by the state must, therefore, be just, fair and reasonable. The court gave a new dimension to the art. 21 and held that the right to live is not merely confined to physical existence, but it includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. [3: Indian constitution of india, article 21] [4: Francis coralie v. union territory of delhi AIR 1994 SC 1844]

It is humbly submitted that in the instant case, accused has faced rigors of multiple trials all over India for one offence which unable to amount an effective defense against the allegation. It violates the basic and fundamental right of accused.

Violation of right to live with dignityThe expression life in article 21 of the Indian constitution does not connote merely physical or animal existence. The right to life includes right to live with human dignity. It is duty of the state not only to protect human dignity but facilitate it by taking positive steps in that direction. Every human being has dignity by virtue of his existence[footnoteRef:5]. All those aspects of life, which make a person live with human dignity are included within the meaning of the word life. The state has a duty to enforce the human rights of a citizen providing for fair and impartial investigation against any person accused of commission of a cognizable offence.[footnoteRef:6] In the instant case, state is unable to provide fair and impartial trail to accused which violate the human rights. [5: M.Nagaraj v. union of india, (2006) 8 SCC 212] [6: State of W.B v. committee for protection of democratic rights (2010) 3 SCC 571]

Therefore, it is humbly submitted that conducting a fair trial for those who are accused of criminal offence is the cornerstone of democracy. Conducting a fair trial is beneficial both to the accused as well as to the society. A conviction resulting from an unfair trial is contrary to our concept of justice.[footnoteRef:7] [7: State of Punjab v. baldev sing AIR 1999 SC 2378]

Violation Right to privacyArticle of 21 of the constitution of India provides protection citizen from oppression and injustice on the other. It shall be strikes a balance between the enforcement of law and protection of the valuable human rights of an accused must be resorted to. In the instant case valuable human right of accused right to privacy has been violated[footnoteRef:8]. [8: Directorate of revenue v. mohdnisarholia (2008) 2 SCC 370]

Violation of right to speedy trialThe Supreme Court has laid great emphasis on speedy trial of criminal offence, and has emphasized it is implicit in the broad sweep and content of article 21[footnoteRef:9]. A fair trial implies speedy trial. No procedure can be reasonable, fair or just unless that procedure ensures a speedy trial for determination of the guilty of such person. [9: Hussainarakhatoon v. home secretary, state of bihar, AIR 1979 SC 1360]

In the case kartarsingh v. state of Punjab the court has observed that the concept of speedy trial is read into article 21 as an essential part of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed and preserved under our constitution. The right to speedy trial begins with the actual restraint imposed by arrest and consequent incarceration and continues at all stages, namely, the stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal and revision so that any possible prejudice that may result from impermissible and avoidable delay from the time of the commission of the offence till it consummates into a finality, can be averred.It is humbly submitted that accused has faced rigors of multiple trials all over India which lead to violation of speedy trial and he would spend the rest of his natural life fighting off the cases.

Administering criminal justice is a two end process, where guarding the ensured rights of the accused under the constitution is as imperative as ensuring justice to the victim. It is definitely a daunting task, but equally a compelling responsibility vested in the court of law to protect and shield the right of both. Thus, a just balance between the fundamental rights of the accused graranteed under the constitution and the expansive power of the police to investigate a cognizable offence has to be struct by the court. Accordingly , the sweeping power of investigation by the police in respect of the same incident, giving rise to one or more cognizable offence[footnoteRef:10]. As a consequence, this is a fit case for quashing the other FIR to meet the ends of justice. [10: Amitbhaianil Chandra shah v. CBI (2013) 6 SCC 348]

Whether the act of denial the clubbing of cases amounting to infringement of the natural justice principle or amounting to gross injustice?

Preamble of the constitution[footnoteRef:11] includes the words, justice social, economic and political liberty of thought, belief, worship..and equality of status and of opportunity, which not only ensures fairness in social and economic activities of the people but also acts as shield to individuals liberty against the arbitrary action which is the base for principle of natural justice. [11: Constitution of india]

Natural justice is indeed a humanising principle for it seeks to ensure that law is fair and just and that there occurs no miscarriage of justice. The phrases substantial justice, fundamental justice, universal justice or fair play in action also alludes to the notion of natural justice. It functions on the basis of preconceptions such as man is basically good and hence he must not be harmed and one ought to treat others as one would like oneself to be treated. it has been criticized as sadly lacking in precision as per the 1914 decision ofR v. Local Government Board, ex p Arlidge[footnoteRef:12]. In spite of its flaws, natural justice is widely accepted, adopted and enforced and is considered an essential part of the philosophy of law. You may disagree with the previous statement saying uncertainty of law is a cardinal sin. However, do bear in mind that the vice of said uncertainty is far outweighed by virtues such as greater possibilities of fairness and prevention of miscarriage of justice among others that the law of natural justice offers. Natural justice mandates procedural fairness and hence seeks to make the decision-making process fair and reasonable. Actions of the public authorities are also subject to be governed by the principles of natural justice. Such actions come under the ambit of administrative law for it is the law that deals with the decision-making of administrative units of the government (administrative tribunals, commissions etc). [12: (1914) 1 KB 160 (199).]

It is content that accused had faced multiplicity of legal proceeding against him in all over India which violate the procedural fairness and principle of natural justice. There is uncertainty in the position of law regarding clubbing FIRs leads to violation of principle of natural justice.

Therefore, It is humbly request to this Honble court to quashing the other FIR to meet the ends of justice.

Whether it is the need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of FIRs?

It is the need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of FIRs.a case wherein in respect of thesame cognizable offence and same occurrence two FIRs hadbeen lodged and the Court held that there can be no secondFIR and no fresh investigation on receipt of every subsequentinformation in respect of the same cognizable offence orsame occurrence giving rise to one or more cognizableoffences[footnoteRef:13]. [13: T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala &Ors. (2001) 6 SCC181]

In the instant case each and every transaction was same and no specific offence thus each offence deserved a one trial. The investigating agency has to proceed only on theinformation about commission of a cognizable offence which isfirst entered in the Police Station diary by the Officer In-chargeunder Section 158 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(hereinafter called the Cr.P.C.) and all other subsequentinformation would be covered by Section 162 Cr.P.C. for thereason that it is the duty of the Investigating Officer not merelyto investigate the cognizable offence report in the FIR but alsoother connected offences found to have been committed in thecourse of the same transaction or the same occurrence andthe Investigating Officer has to file one or more reports underSection 173 Cr.P.C. Even after submission of the report underSection 173(2) Cr.P.C., if the Investigating Officer comesacross any further information pertaining to the sameincident, he can make further investigation, but it is desirablethat he must take the leave of the court and forward thefurther evidence, if any, with further report or reports underSection 173(8) Cr.P.C. In case the officer receives more thanone piece of information in respect of the same incidentinvolving one or more than one cognizable offences suchinformation cannot properly be treated as an FIR as it would,in effect, be a second FIR and the same is not in conformitywith the scheme of the Cr.P.C.The court further observed that A just balance between the fundamental rightsof the citizens under Articles 19 and 21 of theConstitution and the expansive power of thepolice to investigate a cognizable offence has tobe struck by the court. There cannot be anycontroversy that sub-section (8) of Section 173CrPC empowers the police to make furtherinvestigation, obtain further evidence (both oraland documentary) and forward a further reportor reports to the Magistrate. However, thesweeping power of investigation does notwarrant subjecting a citizen each time to freshinvestigation by the police in respect of thesame incident, giving rise to one or morecognizable offences, consequent upon filing ofsuccessive FIRs.

Therefore, it is humbly submitted before this Honble court that in the matter, all FIR was club into a single FIRs as the offence all formed a part and parcel of the same transaction viz. the accused duping the public at large. Thus it is need of hour to come with and accurate legislation regarding clubbing of FIR.Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of conspiracy?

It is humbly contended that Mr. Amit Sharma ( hereinafter to be referred to as the accused) is not guilty of the offence under sec. 120B of the Indian penal code, 1860 ( hereinafter to berefered to as IPC ). In the matter at hand, it has been wrongfully alleged that the accused has committed the offense of conspiracy. It is to be noted that essential elements of Sec. 120B are s follows:- A. There should be an agreement between the person who are alleged to conspire.B. The agreement should bea. For doing an illegal act orb. For doing by illegal means or act, which may not itself be illegalC. In cases, other than an agreement to commit an offense, the agreement must be followed by an overt act.The ingredients of the offense of criminal conspiracy are clear that there should be an agreement the person who are alleged to conspiracy, but in the matter, there was no agreement between Mr. Sharma and Baba mete ji even there was no meeting of the mind to commit such crime of conspiracy. Russell on crime[footnoteRef:14] the gist of the offense of conspiracy, then lies not in doing the act or effecting the purpose for which the conspiracy is formed, nor attempting to do them, nor in inciting others to do them , but in the forming of the scheme or agreement between the parties, an agreement is essential. Mere knowledge, or even discussion, of the plan is not, per se enough. [14: 12th ed. Vol-1, p. 202]

No agreementThere was no agreement between baba mataji and accused to commit such fraud even there was no meeting of the mind to commit such crime of conspiracy. But conspiracy consists in the agreement of two or more persons to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. The essence of the offence of conspiracy is the fact of combination by agreement. The agreement may be express or implied, or in part express and in part implied. The conspiracy arises and the offence is committed as soon as the agreement is made. The actusreus in a conspiracy is the agreement to execute the illegal conduct, not the execution of it. It is not enough that two or more person pursued the same unlawful object at the same time or in the same place, it is necessary to show a meeting of minds, a consensus to effect an unlawful purpose. It is not however necessary that each conspirator should have been in communication with every other.[footnoteRef:15] [15: Halsbury;s laws of England (4th ed., vol.11, p.44,p.58)]

Circumstantial evidence is unreliableIt is a well settled principle that where the case is mainly based on circumstantial evidence, the court must satisfy itself that various circumstanced in the chain of evidence should be established clearly and that the completed chain must be such as to rule out a reasonable likelihood of the innocence of the accused[footnoteRef:16]. [16: Mohan Lalv. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1974 SC]

When even a link breaks away, the chain of circumstances gets snapped and other circumstances cannot in any manner establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts[footnoteRef:17]. When attempting to convict on circumstantial evidence alone the Court must be firmly satisfied of the following three things:[footnoteRef:18] [17: JanarLal Das v. State of Orissa, 1991 (3) SCC 27; A. Jayaram and An r. v. State of AP, AIR 1995 SC 2128.] [18: Mahmoodv. State of UP AIR 1976 SC 69]

i. The circumstances from which the inference of guilt is to be drawn, must have fully been established by unimpeachable evidence beyond a shadow of doubt

ii. The circumstances are of determinative tendency, unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused

iii. The circumstances taken collectively, are incapable of explanation on any reasonable hypothesis except that of the guilt sought to be proved against him

The prosecution fails to pinpoint how the accused is solely responsible for securing entrance to the accused or instigating the commission of the crime, notwithstanding that the entire case rests solely upon uncorroborated circumstantial evidence. Therefore, it is humbly submitted before this Honble Court that the charge of conspiracy against the accused cannot be made in the present matter.The prosecution is unable to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt:

It is submitted that as per the Law of india, the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Halsburys Laws of England maintains that prosecution should prove to full criminal standards any fact essential to admissibility of evidence[footnoteRef:19]. The abovementioned arguments do prove that there lies a reasonable doubt in all the charges framed against the accused. [19: Halsburys Laws of England 1374 (5th ed., Vol. 11.3, LexisNexis Butterworths 2010).]

The conviction is fallacious as mens rea and actus reus is absent

It is a fundamental principle of criminal law that a person may not be convicted of a crime unless the prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt both (a) that responsibility is attributed to the accused for a certain behaviour or the existence of a certain state of affairs, in circumstances forbidden by criminal law and that the accused has caused the prescribed event and (b) that the accused had a defined state of mind in relation to the behaviour, existence of a state of affairs or causing of the event.[footnoteRef:20]In other words in every case the two elements of crime; actus reus and mens rea have to be proved. [20: David Ormerod, Smith and Hogans Criminal Law,(13th Edition,Oxford University Press,2011)]

Absence of requisite mens rea

A criminal act generally requires some element of wrongful intent or other fault.[footnoteRef:21] This is known as mens rea or guilty mind.[footnoteRef:22] In the instant matter, the accused has been convicted of the offences of Cheating and Criminal Conspiracy. It is submitted that the mens rea for either of the crimes is absent in the instant matter. [21: Glanville Williams, Text Book Of Criminal Law,( 2nd Edition,Universal Law Publishing,1999)] [22: The Digest 17 (1st ed., Vol 14 (2), London Butterworths & Co. Ltd. 1993).]

Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of fraud?

It is humbly contended that Mr. Amit Sharma (hereinafter to be referred to as the accused) is not guilty of the offence under Section 17 of Indian Contract Act, 1872. In the matter at hand, it has been wrongfully alleged that the accused has committed the offence of fraud. It is to be noted that the essential elements of fraud are as follows:1) Intent to deceive another party;2) Knowledge about the falsity of the statement;3) A promise made without any intention of performing it;4) Any act fitted to deceive.The above essential clearly states that Mr. Sharma is not liable for the offence of fraud because He had no intention to deceive people. Neither he had knowledge about the falsity of Baba Mataji nor he made any promise without the intention of performing it. Fraud was defined in the well-known decision of the House of Lords by Lord Herschell as Fraud is when it is sure that the false representation has been made- a) Knowingly, b) Without belief in its truth, c) Recklessly careless whether it be true or false[footnoteRef:23]. [23: Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337]

The expression any other act fitted to deceive naturally means any act which is done with the obvious intention of committing fraud[footnoteRef:24]. [24: Ningawwa v ByrappaShiddappaHirekurabar, AIR 1968 S.C. 956MuktilalAgarwal v trustees of the P.F. A.I.R. 1956 S.C. 336]

Innocent misrepresentation- when a person makes a false statement but there is neither an intention to deceive, nor any negligence in making the statement, there is no liability for such a statement under law of torts because in such a case an action cannot lie either for fraud ,or for negligent misstatement.[footnoteRef:25] [25: Law of torts, R.K. Bangia]

Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof, he has suffered a loss, then, if a person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages in respect thereof, had the misrepresentation been made fraudulently, that person shall be so liable notwithstanding that the misrepresentation was not made fraudulently, unless he proves that he has reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made that the facts represented were true[footnoteRef:26]. [26: Hedley Byrne and Co. Ltd. V Heller and Partners (1964) A.C. 495]

There is no actus reus on the part of the accused

The physical element of a crime or behaviour connected to the crime is called the actus reus.A person must participate in all the acts necessary to constitute a particular crime in order to be guilty thereof[footnoteRef:27]. In the present case, there has been no establishment that the accused was responsible for the alleged fraudulent representation or that he conspired to do the same. [27: Scott v. Com., Ky. 353, 197 S.W. 2d 774 (1946). ]

The alleged fraudulent representation cannot be attributed to accused:It is a widely accepted principle of common law that the prosecution must prove that the accused by his own act caused the relevant result and it should be an intended causation.

For the accused to be convicted it has to be substantiated that the fraudulent representation was caused by his own actions. In the instant matter, the evidence offered fails to ascertain the same. Accused did not false representation knowingly. He did not know about the truth and believed that baba mataji has power to triplicate money even though mr.sharma was a bit skeptical of this new power he gave the money and was convinced when baba converted his 1 lac to 3 lac just in days . Therefore, it is humbly submitted that accused did not commit such offence.

Whether Mr. Amit Sharma is liable for offence of cheating?

It is humbly contended before this Honble Court that MrAmitsharma (hereinafter to be referred to as the accused) is not guilty of the offences under Sec. 420 of the IndianPenal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as theIPC). In the matter at hand, it has beenwrongfully alleged that the accused has committed offence of cheating. Sec 420 deals with certain aggravated forms or specified classes of cheating. To constitute an offence under section, the essential ingredients are as follows[footnoteRef:28]:- [28: Indian oil corpn. V. NEPC india Ltd. (2006) 3 SCC (cri) 188]

a) Deception of a person either by making a false or misleading representation or by other action or omission

b) Fraudulent or dishonest inducement of that person to either deliver any property or to consent to the retention thereof by any person or to intentionally induce that person to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property.

It is humbly submitted that the accused did not commit or attempt to commit offence of cheating nor did he act conjointly with the other and coupled with heavy reliance by the prosecution on unreliable presumption evidence.

False or misleading representationIt is contended that the accused did not mislead the people all over the india even they did not know about baba mataji had intent to committed such fraud. He did not deceit the people for multiply the money. Accused have no knowledge about the deception at that time. He believed on baba without any wrongful intention .Therefore, it is content those accused did not false or mislead representation. Hence he would not be liable for cheating.

Fraudulent or dishonest inducement of personAccused did not dishonestly or fraudulently induce the people all over India. All people were believed on baba mataji and give their money.

Intention to defraud is absent:The most basic ingredient of the offence of cheating under 420 of the in IPC is intent to defraud. Intention forms the gist of the offence. Intention literally means a conscious movement with knowledge of the circumstances. In the present matter, the accused has alleged that money was obtained by accused on the basis of a fraudulent representation. To entrap the accused it is necessary to prove that he had the intention or knowledge that the act in question was fraudulent in nature. The Prosecution has presented no such evidence so as to ascertain that there existed such an intention.

No mens rea as to circumstances:The evidentiary burden in the instant matter lies with the Prosecution. A guilty state of mind of the accused has to be established. The Prosecution at best can prove the blameworthy mind of the Group. The accused, in the instant matter, had no intention to commit the offences. As Glanville Williams observed that the proof of a mans intention can be probed by determining whether there is a any reasonable interpretation of his actions other than the hypothesis that he intended the consequences.

It is contended that there exists no mens rea in the present case.

No coincidence between actus reus and mens rea:

The only concept known to law is crime; and the crime exists only when actus reus and mens rea coincide. It is established that if there were two acts and the first act, though accompanied by the mens rea did not lead to the commission of the crime, whereas the second act, not accompanied by the mens rea caused the injury, the accused must be acquitted.[footnoteRef:29]In the present case there is no coincidence between the two and hence no crime has been committed. [29: R v. Khandu, (1890) ILR 15 Bom 195; R v. Shorty, [1950] SR]

In light of the contentions made by the petitioner it is most humbly contended that the elements of crime are absent.

PRAYER

In lights of the facts presented, questions raised, arguments advanced and authority cited the counsels for the Respondent most humbly and respectfully pray before this Honble Court, that it may be pleased to adjudge and declare that:

a) The petition filled by the Petitioner is maintainable. .

b) To consolidate and club all the cases against him in one single trial.

c) Each and every transaction was a same and no specific offence and thus each offence does not deserve a separate trail.

d) In order to grant a bail.

The Court being satisfied may also make any such order as it may deem fit in the light of Justice, Equity and Good conscience.

And for this act of kindness the Respondent shall as duty bound ever humbly pray. Respectfully submitted,

(Counsels Appearing for petitioner)

3