MOOT COURT PROBLEMS

Problem No: 1

The Marriage between the Appellant and the Respondent was solemnized on 31-01-
2000 as per the Hindu Religious Rites and Customs. Out of the said wedlock a son,
namely Rahul was born, and he is 12 years old now. At the time of marriage, the
Respondent was Businessman at U.S.A. After marriage the Appellant and the
Respondent lived together for 3 months and thereafter lived separately because of the
misunderstanding between them. Since the harassment and cruelty of the Respondent
crossed the extreme extent, the appellant was compelled to file a petition for divorce
on the ground of cruelty. The Respondent filled an original petition under the
Guardians and Wards Act for the custody of the 11 years old minor child, and a petition
under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for Restitution of Conjugal Right. The main
allegation of the Respondent was that the Appellant was having illegal intimacy with
another person. The second contention was that, if the child is in the company of the
Appellant, it would affect the education of the child. The Respondent also contended
that he is financially better than the Appellant and hence the custody of the child be
given to him.
The Appellant defended the matter and filed a written statement denying all the
allegations. In the meantime, the Subordinate Judge of Gautama Buddha Nagar
passed an expert decree of divorce in favour of the Appellant and the petition for
restitution of conjugal rights filed by the Respondent was dismissed for default. After
considering the oral evidence adduced by the parties and examining the documentary
evidence and interviewing the child the trial court concluded keeping in view that
welfare of the child the custody should be given to the mother and dismissed the
original petition of the father filed under the Guardians and Wards Act. Against the
order of the Trial Court, the Respondent filed an appeal before the High Court of Uttar
Pradesh.
The contention of the Respondent was that contrary to the deposition made by the
Appellant before the trial court that, she would not remarry, immediately after the
judgment of the petition filed under the Guardians and Wards Act, she remarried. It is,
therefore, contended that 4 Page the continued custody of the child with the Appellant
would be detrimental to the interest, progress and welfare of the child. The High Court,
without giving an opportunity to express the willingness of the child, allowed the appeal
on the ground of remarriage of the Appellant, i.e., Mother of the child. The High Court
also held that the Respondent – Father is a Businessman in U.S.A and the father is
more apt and suitable to protect the interest of the minor child and in imparting
education to the required standard of the child. Aggrieved against the order passed by
the High Court, the Appellant has preferred the Civil Appeal to this Moot – Court.

Moot problem: 2

1. Mr. Alex belonging to an economically backward class family from Uttam Desh, A
state of India and Ms. Siri of an economically forward class family hailing from
Indraprastha another state of India were working in a Multi-national company in NCTR
(National Capital Territorial Region) since 2013; although their department were
different yet they used to meet often during lunch hours.
2. After sometime Mr. Alex having got a hike of Rs. 5000/-, changed the company.
Later after a gap of 2 years they met again at a wedding function of a common friend
and exchanged their contact numbers. They started chatting and this ended up in
some personal meets and the frequency of these meetings increased with time.
3. The venue of their meets spanned their homes, offices and coffee-shops. By 2017
they realized that they were in love and eventually, got married with the consent of
their parents in 2019 according to Hindu rites and rituals, in Rostampur District, Uttam
Desh.
4. They were happy in the initial days of their marriage, however on 15th day of
marriage in the morning when Ms. Siri went to her office, she didn’t return to her marital
home until night; as time passed, all the family members got worried. Alex and his
parents tried to call Ms Siri continuously but she didn’t respond to any of their calls.
5. On 16th day of marriage Alex and his parents visited her mother’s house and Siri,
too, was there with her. Her in-laws and husband told her that this behaviour from their
daughter-in-law was unacceptable. Yet, they condescended to give her a chance and
wanted her to come back to her marital home again. To which, Siri replied, that she
was not happy with her marriage and she would not come back. Siri’s mother
interrupted and said that she would convince and send her back.
6. After 26th day of marriage, Ms. Siri lodged a complaint at Mauj Khas Police Station,
Indraprastha under Section 498A, IPC that Alex and his parents used to torture her
and her mother-in-law used to taunt her that she had done ‘black magic’ on her son
because of which he fell in love with her, otherwise they were getting good proposals
for his marriage. She also showed injury marks on her hand and shoulder to the lady-
constable while lodging the FIR.
7. The Police investigated the matter but did not find any credible evidence; hence
closed the investigation, with the remarks that no offence was made out and the injury
marks appeared to be accidental in nature and no evidence sufficient to proceed was
discovered during the investigation; the police also cited that this was a normal
practice of today’s society to harass the in-laws, and the daughters-in-law often adopt
such practices. During investigation police also recorded statement of one of the
neighbours of Alex wherein he confirmed that Alex`s bike was damaged due to
accident.
8. After that incident, one day when Alex was with his friend Paul in a bar, he started
crying. When Paul asked the reason for it, he confided that he had been in love with
Siri but she left their home. She had said that she would not live with Alex in a small
house and wanted him to buy a villa or a big apartment. She also wished that they
both should start living separately. Alex even asked his friend for a loan to buy a house
in order to fulfil Ms. Siri’s wish but still Ms. Siri left and never returned though Alex
wanted her in his life and it was impossible for him to survive without her.
9. After listening to the story of Mr. Alex, Mr. Paul suggested that Mr. Alex could file a
petition for restitution of conjugal rights and after that Mr Alex filed a petition for
restitution of conjugal rights in the Family Court of Rostampur District, Uttam Desh.
10. In the said petition, the court issued a process in the name of Siri but it never
reached Siri as she had moved from that place; on continuous failure to serve
summons, the Family Court passed ex-parte order in favour of Mr Alex.
11. Meanwhile, Siri wanting to move to another state so that she will get a changed
environment as she felt disturbed here, she found a job in a company based in Channi
a southern state of India. She moved to Channi for her joining.
12. While at office she used to avoid gatherings but one day her boss Mr. S Raja asked
her the reason of such avoidance which she refused to answer.
13. After that, her boss started giving her extra attention, he started spending more
time with her in office and one day they met outside the office where she disclosed
about her marital disputes. She stated that her husband was an alcoholic and he used
to mistreat her and often harassed her physically and that is why she decided to come
out from that toxic relationship and left the marital home and moved to Channi. On the
very next day Mr. S Raja proposed she for marriage and surprisingly she without any
hesitation agreed to enter into second marriage but Mr. S Raja advised her that first
she had to get divorce then only they would enter into a marriage.
14. She filed a divorce petition in the Family Court, Naalpur district of Channi on the
grounds of cruelty. Family court issued summons on the address of Mr. Alex but
unfortunately Alex having shifted to another place, the summons were not served.
Under the circumstances, the Family Court granted an ex-parte decree in favour of
Siri. Following this, Siri entered into a marriage agreement with Mr. S Raja.
15. On the other hand, Family Court of Rostampur District, Uttam Desh gave the
decision in the favour Mr Alex but this decision did not benefit Mr. Alex anymore
because Siri had moved out from his contact completely. He started going to the bar
again, where he met Mr. Paul.
16. Paul stated that he was looking for him for several days because he wanted to let
him know that the one he was dying for, was already available on one matrimonial site
where she was looking for a husband and stated a status of divorcee. But Alex said
that they weren’t divorced so it was impossible. To verify the fact, they went to Channi
to meet Siri, and Siri narrated the story that she had decree in her favour from Family
Court of Naalpur district of Channi and she was married to someone else and asked
her privacy to be respected. Mr Alex said that he also has an order in his favour for
restitution of conjugal rights and he would not let her go and wanted her back in his
life.
17. Mr Alex approached the High Court of Channi in appellate jurisdiction to challenge
the decree passed in favour of Siri along with additional prayer that she should be
charged for bigamy and Siri also challenged ex-parte order of restitution of conjugal
rights in High Court of Uttam Desh.
18. Along with an application in the Supreme Court for the transfer of both the petitions
in High Court of Uttam Desh was filed and Supreme Court transferred the same and
now the matter is listed before the High Court of Uttam Desh with following issues: -
1. Whether decree passed in the favour of Siri is valid or liable to be set aside?
2. Whether order of restitution of conjugal rights passed in favour of Mr Alex is valid
or liable to set aside?
3. Whether Siri can be prosecuted for bigamy or not?

Problem No: 3
PISHACHU is a democratic country having a Constitution similar to that of India. The
majority party after coming to power had formed the Government and brought a
Constitutional amendment, which provides 15% reservation for Economically
Backward Classes (EBC). The country already had a reservation of 49% for socially
and Educationally Backward Classes. This has caused civil disturbance among
various communities and sections of the society throughout the PISHACHU. From
various places anti-reservation movement rocked the nation, resulting in a huge loss
of persons & property. REMO, a student studying in Kalikrati University (a Central
University), located in ALOKAM, a state of PISHACHU; is a leader of the youth wing
of the Kheyo Kheyo Party (KKP) which happens to be in the opposition; sought
permission from the authorities to organize a cultural event wherein the students and
the professors would participate in a discussion relating to the policies of the current
Government. The University Authorities provided him with the permission to organize
the event, but also clearly stated that they were not allowed to hold discussion on the
reservation policies of Government. When questioned about the latter condition the
University Authorities clearly abstained from providing the reason behind the
imposition of the condition and told that they are an autonomous institution and had
all the rights to do so. The cultural program was to begin at 7:00 P.M. At around 6:00
P.M.a march took place from one of the hostels in the campus and headed towards
the proposed venue along with the crowd, which included students, professors and a
group of people who were not recognized by the hostel authorities. In the middle of
their way towards the venue, many people joined the march with anti-national posters
and slogans were crooned which were regarding the policies of the Government
including the current reservation policy. According to a section of media reports it was
alleged that the slogans raised were highly derogatory and seditious and did not just
oppose the policies of the Government but also the Nation. It was also reported that
the posters contained the quotes from a citizen convicted as a terrorist JULINIALANI
which stated “THE BIGGEST DISEASE IS CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT, SYSTEM
& NATION. THE VACCINE IS THE TRANSPARENCY”. 20 MOOT PROBLEM Youth
leaders from different political parties were seen participating in the march and were
restraining the students from reaching the venue, due to which the two parties had a
fight which turned into a mob. One of the girls named RIKA who was protesting against
the policy of reservation was molested and touched badly. The media was also present
at the said location. The whole incident was recorded and published in pieces. The
same was also reported to the nearest police station which led to the arrest of REMO
and RIKA along with a few others for offences under the Penal Code of the Country
for provoking citizens against the Government. Next day, the students from the
University who believed that REMO and RIKA were innocent and their freedom of
speech and expression were being curbed by the University Authority and the
Government, peacefully assembled in large numbers near the Vice Chancellor’s office
and started raising slogans against him and the Central Government. SHEILIA, one of
the students of the social sciences department, who was not active in any of the
student political parties came forward and threatened the authorities and police that
she would burn herself if the reservation for the Economically Backward Classes is not
taken back. RAHU, being the friend of REMO along with the Vice President of the
University Union gathered more people to protest. He poured kerosene on himself and
took out a matchstick in his hand and threatened that he would also join SHEILIA, if
the demands were not fulfilled in next three days. Meanwhile a petition was also filed
before the Hon’ble High Court of ALOKAM by Dr.BIJYUE, a professor of the University
against the amendment brought by the Government and the reservation policy causing
civil disturbance among various communities and sections of the society throughout
the ALOKAM. To control the situation, the High Court took cognizance and passed
orders prohibiting the assembly of more than four people together. Dr. BIJYUE gave
a media bite supporting the demands of the students. On the third day of the protest
SHEILIA burnt herself. RAHU continued to sit with a matchbox and threatened the
authorities for committing suicide like SHEILIA. He also gave a speech which was
covered by different media houses. After what SHEILIA did, many other student unions
at different colleges came up protesting within ALOKAM and fifteen more suicides took
place within a week. RAHU along with his three friends AMKUL, VINASH and
AVISHESH who were also sitting with RAHU were arrested for abetment of suicide in
all the cases. Also, on the basis of a speech given by Dr. BIJYUE he was also arrested
under the charge of abetment, sedition and criminal conspiracy for being a member of
the same party to which some of the student protesters belonged. The protests were
finally controlled by the Central Government through military forces, bringing peace to
the state of ALOKAM. The ruling State Government of ALOKAM (which is in opposition
in Central Government) was widely criticized in the media, and by various political
parties and NGO’s, for inaction. The Chief Minister, MORAN DALWAN, and the Vice
Chancellor of the University were asked for tendering apology to the Citizen and for
resignation. They refused and an official party statement was released by the Chief
Minister expressing deep anguish at the provocative suicides and promises to take
action. The Chief Minister described the acts as “spontaneous” and killings of students
as terrible. He said his State government was “helpless” in controlling the situation.
Subsequently, an NGO called HUMAN SOUL published a report accusing the State
Government of killings, and particularly the Chief Minister of being directly responsible
for the killings by organizing and inciting through the party members to provoke suicide
among students. CM denied the reports and filed a prosecution for a defamation case
in the local courts against the NGO directly. That matter is ongoing and the Court has
asked the CM to justify why the complaint is not filed through the State prosecutor.
The Special Prosecutor submitted an indictment for confirmation to the Trial against
Accused CMMORAN DALWAN, who was then charged with crimes of initiation of
rioting, killings as per the indictment. CM pleaded not guilty. MORAN DALWAN was
detained in a Special Detention Facility. The Supreme Court by witnessing the protests
has taken a suo moto cognizance of the entire situation and constituted a bench to
adjudicate on the following issues:
1. Whether the implementation of 15% reservation for Economically Backward
Classes (EBC) by the Central Government is unconstitutional?
2. Whether the restrictions imposed by the University curbs the rights of free speech
and expression?
3. Whether the State Government can be held liable for their failure to discharge
constitutional duties?
4. Whether the arrest and criminal charges brought against the individual student and
the professor is justified?