BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE, SANGLI

NOTICE Date- 09/05/2022

All the students of LL.B.III and Pre Law V are hereby informed that
Moot Court Activity No.II and Moot Court Activity No. III is scheduled on 14th
May, 2022 and 20th May, 2022 respectively. Every student shall be present on
these days. The absentee students shall not be entertained lateron. In case of
absentee student, he himself will be responsible for his academic loss.

Rules-

1. The students shall wear uniform prescribed by BCI for advocates.

2. Two copies of memorial (one handwritten and one Xerox)
3. The Cover Page of the Memorial must have the following colour Scheme-
a. Blue - for Petitioner
b. Red - for Respondent
4. Memorial shall be English only.
5. Each memorial must be 30 to 40 pages on A4 size blank white paper.
6. Contents of Memorial-
a. Cover page
b. Table of Contents
c. Index of Authorities
d. Statement of Jurisdiction
e. Issues Raised
f. Summary of Arguments
g. Arguments Advanced
h. Prayer
7. Necessary books, citations and reports for reference must be brought by the
students only.
Important-

The “Moot Court Activity No. II”and “Moot Court Activity No. III”
will be conducted in following manner-

Court Hall Venue Presided Over Roll No. of Moot

No. By Students Problem
Court Hall Existing Moot Prof. Sanjay LL.B. III Moot
No.1 Court Hall Aher Roll No. 1 to Problem 1
30
Court Hall LL.B. I Class Prof. LL.B. III Moot
No.2 Room Prashant Roll No. 31 to Problem 2
Jarandikar 60
Court Hall LL.B. III/ Pre Prof. LL.B. III Moot
No.3 V Class Sanjeevkumar Roll No. 61 to Problem 3
Room Sable 93
Court Hall LL.B. II/ Pre Prof. Pallavi Pre Law V Moot
No.4 IV Class Mane Roll No. 1 to Problem 4
Room 30
Court Hall Pre Law I Prof. Anita Pre Law V Moot
No.5 Class Room Patil Roll No. 31 to Problem 5
50

Note-

1. The lectures of Pre Law III, Pre Law IV, LL.B. I and LL.B. II shall remain
suspended on 14th and 20th May, 2022.
2. The lectures of Pre Law I and Pre Law II on 14th and 20th May, 2022 will be
as per their timetable.
Principal

BV’s New Law College, Sangli

 BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE, SANGLI

MOOT COURT ACTIVITY NO. II

MOOT PROBLEM 1

(Prof. Sanjay Aher)

1. Indus is a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic. Indus boasts of thousands of

years of culture and civilisation. Majority of the people in Indus followed Hind religion, the
oldest religion in the world. Indus was originally ruled by kings of native origin followed by
some Muslim rulers in Northern and Eastern part of Indus. In the mediaeval period Indus was
under colonial rule from the second half of the 17th century till she attained independence in
1947. The Constitution of Indus came into existence in the year 1950 since then Indus is the
largest democracy in the world.

2. Majority of the people in Indus followed Hind religion. Though Hind is the common name of
the religion the same is further divided into various sects and subsets. The spiritual philosophers
from various disciplines of Hind religion enriched the religion with unique cultural diversity.

3. Majority of the people practicing Hind religion followed coparcenary system of property
rights. The unique feature of coparcenary system is that male descendants up to four generation
acquire equal property rights by birth. Unfortunately, women were not coparceners until 2005.

4. After series of discussions and deliberations the various branches of Hind religion was
brought under a common law governing succession in the year 1956.Accordingly the Hind
Succession Act,1956 was enacted. The age-old practice of coparcenary system practically got
wiped off and the principles governing law of succession in Hind Law of Succession Act
regulates succession of properties of people dying intestate.

5. The second largest religion is Muslim religion. The recitals in Quran, the longstanding
practice of the founder of the religion, codified Shariat Act and judicial pronouncement
determine the question regarding law of succession regarding Muslims living in Indus.

6. Durga is a voluntary NGO committed for the upliftment of women and fighting for the
elimination of all practices of gender discrimination. Durga filed a writ petition under Article 32
of the Constitution of Indus with other two petitioners named Mrs Sharada Devi and Mrs
Fathima Beevi as petitioners 2 and 3.

7. Mrs Sharada Devi is a poor widow and the mother of Late Dr Rukmini. Sharda Devi worked
as a house maid and with the hard-earned money she provided education to her daughter who
ultimately became a doctor. Dr Rukmini married Dr Rajeev in the year 2015.Dr. Rukmani was a
famous gynaecologist and with her self-acquired income she purchased a posh flat in Mumbai
with an approximate value of 2 crore rupees. She is also having a bank balance of nearly 1 crore
rupees. The matrimonial relationship of Dr. Rukmani with Dr. Rajeev was completely broken
down. Dr. Rajeev deserted her and without obtaining divorce started to reside with another lady.
Sharada Devi and her daughter were is residing in the flat. On 20/05/2021, Dr. Rukmani met
with a car accident and passed away on the spot at the age of 30. She is having no children and
the husband of Dr Rukmini, Dr Rajeev claimed the entire property of Dr Rukmini to the total
exclusion of her mother Sharada. Sharada Devi filed writ petition challenging the constitutional
validity of the relevant sections of Hind Succession Act.

8. Mrs Fathima the third petitioner herein is the youngest unmarried daughter of late Mr
Mohammed Khan. At the time of death of late Muhammad Khan, he left 50 acres of landed
property in Manipuram village in Kerala. The heirs entitled to succeed the property are his two
sons and the third petitioner. According to Muslim law of succession, she is entitled to inherit
only one half of the property inherited by her brothers. She challenged the religious instruction
providing double share to brothers as discriminatory and violative of fundamental rights

9. NGO, Durga challenged various sections and schedules of the Hind Succession Act, 1956 on
the ground that succession of a male and female is separately governed and separate order of
succession is provided in the act as arbitrary, gender discriminatory and unconstitutional.

10.Mr Hemanth a person belonging to Hind religion filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of Indus.The facts for filing of writ petition are as follows: The marriage between
Mr Hemanth and Mrs Vaishnavi was solemnised in the year 1980 as per Hind marriage rites and
ceremonies; a boy named Arun was born to them out of the wedlock in 1982.The relationship
between them was irretrievably broken down. Ultimately both the parties by mutual consent
pronounced divorce in the year 1992. The permanent custody of the minor ward Arun was
entrusted to his father. Vaishnavi remarried and is living with her husband and two children
whereas Mr Hemanth remained unmarried and brought up the child Arun with his hard-earned
money. Arun gallops in business and became a successful businessman at the age of 25, Arun
purchased posh villas in the heart of Mumbai city apart from costly cars, jewellery and had
sound bank balance. Arun passed away following a massive sudden heart attack at the age of 30
and is unmarried and issueless. Vaishnavi the mother of Arun claimed the entire property of
Arun to the total exclusion of his father invoking Hind Succession Act. Mr Hemanth challenged
the constitutional validity of Hind Succession Act excluding the property rights of father in toto.

11.Vairamani is a transgender following Hind religion. Vairamani adopted a boy and a girl and is
residing with the adopted children, father and mother. Vairamani passed away interstate and the
compromise formula regarding the distribution of property of Vairamani among adopted
children, father and mother failed. The mother filed a suit for partition before a Civil Court and
the suit was dismissed on the ground that there was no provision in Hind Succession Act dealing
with the succession of transgenders.The mother filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the
Constitution of Indus that while Vairamani being a Hind who follows Hind customs and
conventions adopted children as per Hind religious principles and hence shall be governed by
Hind law of succession and non-mentioning of provisions regarding the intestate succession of
transgenders is not a ground for dismissing the civil suit as not maintainable. 12. The Supreme
Court of Indus clubbed together all the writ petitions and posted the case for hearing and
disposal.

II. DISCLAIMER:

* Laws of the Republic of Indus are pari materia with the laws of India.
 BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE,

SANGLI MOOT COURT ACTIVITY NO. II

MOOT PROBLEM 2

(Prof. Prashant Jarandikar)

Modisha, an eastern Scindian state on the Bay of Raingol, is known for its tribal cultures and its
many ancient monuments. The capital, Hindueswar, which is home to hundreds of temples, has
recently been titled as the smartest city of the nation by the Union Government. In 2002, the Union
Parliament enacted the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter “the PML Act”)
acknowledging the urgent need for a comprehensive legislation to prevent money-laundering and
connected activities, confiscation of proceeds of crime and setting up of agencies and mechanisms
for coordinating measures to combat money-laundering.

Background of the case –

A case was recorded for investigation about alleged commission of offence of money-laundering
under Section 3 of the PML Act against Mr. Rahul Sindhey, Mr. Joseph Roy, Mr. Nikhil Rajput and
Mr. Deepak Singhal. Upon perusal of materials/evidences placed before Joint Director,
Enforcement Directorate (ED), Hindueswar following facts emerged:-

1.On 06.03.2016, Hindueswar Sub-zonal Office of ED recorded an Enforcement Case Information

Report vide ECIR No. 22/HDS/2016 against the aforesaid persons for initiating action under the
PML Act on the basis of FIR no. 34 dated 03.12.2015 registered u/s 364/326/307/302/120-
B/506/201/34 Scindian Penal Code, 1860 [SPC] and FIR no. 09 dated 06.01.2016 u/s 25/27 Arms
Act registered by City Square Police Station, Hindueswar.

2. The forenamed persons were also charged jointly and severally o allegations u/Ss
387/384/489(B)/489(C)/294/419/420/458/467/471 of the Scindian Penal Code, 1860 [SPC] in
multiple cases but only one FIR bearing FIR No. 16 has been registered by the College Road Police
Station, Hindueswar.

3. The said FIRs against the forenamed persons were registered on the basis of allegation of
perpetration of various crimes such as abduction, murder, criminal conspiracy, criminal
intimidation, extortion, cheating, tender-fixing, possession of illegal arms and ammunitions,
running illegal trade of arms and ammunitions, possession of counterfeit currencies, forgery etc.,

4. On the basis of the complaints, the police conducted searches in various places including the
residential houses, offices of the Individual accused persons and the forenamed persons were
arrested on different dates by the Commissionerate Police, Hindueswar from several places. During
the search police seized various items from different places such as arms & ammunition, counterfeit
currencies, documents relating to transaction of crypto currency, currency counting machines,
premium high class vehicles, huge amount of cash and various incriminating documents like fake
voter ID, fake PAN card, fake Driving License in the name of non-existing persons were recovered
from the premises which belong to Mr. Rahul Sindhey and other arrested suspects.
5.It has been alleged that these arms and ammunitions were illegally kept for extortion, murder etc.
and other connected activities, and that Mr. Rahul Sindhey and his associates (other suspects) were
selling these illegal arms and ammunitions. It has also been alleged that Mr. Rahul Sindhey along
with his associates were collecting huge amount of money by fixing tenders with different
government establishments and from extortions.

6. During the investigation, the police recorded statement of 89 persons who were allegedly
victimized, over the years, by Mr. Rahul Sindhey and his associates by way of extortions and other
illegal activities.

7. Subsequently, Final form was submitted by the police bearing Nos. 88/18.05.2016,
68/22.05.2016, 67/23.06.2016, where in 85 numbers of charge sheeted witnesses were shown and
their statements recorded U/s 161 Cr.P.C. was also filed along with the seizure list of the above
mentioned articles.

8. So far as the charges are concerned, the charges were made under Section 120(B), 302, 307, 364-
A, 384, 386, 387, 411, 419, 420, 467, 471, 489(B) of SPC, 1860 and Sections 25 & 27 of Scindia
Arms Acts, 1959, which are scheduled offences under the provisions of the PML Act. The trial in
the aforesaid scheduled offences, however, are sub judice till date before the competent criminal
courts.

9. The magnitude of the alleged offences involved was so high and on the other hand there were
allegations of involvement of high profile persons in the case, which attracted the attention of the
Department of Revenue and Department of Finance. It was realized that the issue poses serious
threat not only to the financial systems of the country but also the integrity and sovereignty, and
thus, the aforesaid departments started looking into it.

10. However, in the light of above alleged criminal activities of the accused persons, recoveries
made and statements recorded by the Police Authorities during the investigations, Enforcement
Directorate (Hereinafter ED) on the alleged basis of having a reason to believe that the movable and
immovable properties (as mentioned herein above) are proceeds of crimes committed by the
accused persons. Therefore, on the basis of the information/ document(s) as mentioned
hereinabove, a case of an offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money
Laundering Act, 2002 and punishable under Section 4 of the said Act was initiated against the
above named perons. Accordingly Hindueswar Sub-zonal Office of ED registered a case vide ECIR
No. 22/HDS/2016 against the aforesaid persons and the case was taken up for investigation under
the provisions of the PML Act (as amended) and the Rules framed thereunder.

11. During the investigation, ED issued notices to the respective accused directing them to submit a
detail note and make a disclosure of the properties both movable and immovable available in their
name and in the name of their family members. In response to the said notices the accused persons
submitted the detailed property lists, bank accounts details and other valuables registered in their
names and in the names of family members, and also recorded their statements u/S. 50 of the PML
Act.
12. Subsequently, in exercise of the powers conferred under Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the
PML Act and in terms of Authorization issued by the Directorate of Enforcement, New Belhi, the
Joint Director, Hindueswar Sub-zonal Office, 6 Enforcement Directorate ordered provisional
attachment, vide Provisional Attachment Order No. 03/2017, of movable and immovable properties
worth Rs. 19,76,55,288/- (Rupees Nineteen Crore Seventy Six Lakhs Fifty Five Thousand Two
Hundred and Eighty Eight only) that belongs to Mr. Rahul Sindhey and his other associates.
13. The attachment order captioned the exact and the entire list of property that has been submitted
by the respective accused and the said list of properties were attached. After some days of the
provisional attachment, the accused persons received notices u/s 8 of the Act from the Adjudicating
Authority (PMLA), New Belhi to show cause as to why the provisional attachment shall not be
confirmed. In the show cause notice u/s 8 of the Act, the authority has only mentioned to appear on
a given date and to file reply.

14. While pendency of these cases the Directorate of Enforcement has also filed another case before
the special court under PMLA under section 45 of the Act against the above named persons.
Notices were issued and the accused persons have filed petitions for dispensing the personal
appearances. The matter is posted for framing of charges after hearing on the petitions for
dispensing of the personal appearance.

The Challenge:

Aggrieved by the aforesaid “provisional attachment order”, all the four accused individually
approached the Hon’ble High Court of Modisha by filing four separate writ petitions under Article
226 and 227 of the Constitution of Scindia challenging thereby the constitutional validity of second
proviso to Section 5 (1) of the PML Act on the grounds that the same is ultra vires Article 14,
Article 20 (3) and other important provisions of the Constitution, and also on the ground that there
could not have been any “reason to believe” to satisfy the preconditions for making a provisional
attachment. The petitioners also challenged the Original Complaints (OC) filed under Section 5 (5)
of the PML Act and the Show Cause Notices (SCNs) issued to them under Section 8 of the PML
Act by the Adjudicating Authority. The petitioners have also challenged the initiation of criminal
trial Under Section 45 of the PMLA Act and prayed for stay of further proceeding by way of an
interim prayer attached to the same writ petition. The challenge in these petitions was, therefore, to
the OCs, the SCNs, and the provisional attachment orders and to all further proceedings in the
aforementioned ECIR.

As a matter of practice, the above mentioned prayers in the petitions (other than the prayer
concerning the challenge to the constitutional validity of the second proviso to Section 5 (1) of the
PML Act) were to be dealt with by learned Single Judges of the Hon’ble High Court of Modisha,
but since the first prayer concerns the constitutional validity 8 of a statutory provision, these writ
petitions were consolidated before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Court. The division bench
referred the matter to a Larger Bench of the said High Court to hear the entire case. Hence the Writ
petition before the larger bench is listed for final hearing .

Notwithstanding, any issues mentioned herein above, participants are free to frame any other issue
of prime importance.

Disclaimer-

The Constitution and other laws of Union of Scindia are very similar to that of Union of India
and the applicable state laws (if any) of Modisha are very similar to that of State of Odisha.
 BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE, SANGLI

MOOT COURT ACTIVITY NO. II

MOOT PROBLEM 3

(Prof. Sanjeevkumar Sable)

A company by name M/s. NAVEEN INDIA RESEARCH ORGANIZATION (NIRO) has

developed a herbal combination which comprises of mace extract, orange peel extract and rose
leaf extract and can be used for a wide range of applications like air purifier and sanitizer is
effective in reducing a wide range of microbial population that is found in the indoor
environment/outdoor environment. The herbal disinfectants, unlike chemical disinfectants, are
safe for human beings and effective against infectious microbes and that kills viruses such as
SARS, MERS and COVID-19 on external surfaces. The product of NIRO is a herbal disinfectant
and sanitizer composition comprising DMSO, ethanol and ethyl acetate extracts of Citrus
Sinensis, Methanol extract of Myristica Fragrant HOUTT and methanol extract of Rosa Indica.
They have tested their product and applied all possible Intellectual Property Rights associated
such as Patent, Trademark, Copyright and Design Rights to the said product all of which have
been granted/Registered to them in India, as in India they choose an expedited examination of
application that helped tackling Pandemic Covid-19 situation. However their corresponding
foreign applications in Pakistan, China, Malaysia and Singapore are pending.

There is another company by name M/s.VIJAY INDIA RESEARCH ORGANIZATION

(VIRO) has developed a product i.e., combination of extracts from rose, citrus peel, mace,
nutmeg and datura and is effective against a variety of micro organisms that are found in indoor
environment/outdoor environment. The composition has shown tremendous antimicrobial
activity against Escheria coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus, Bacillus cereus,
Pseudomonas sp., Aspergillus sp., Candida sp., Penicillium and Alternaria sp. being natural these
are both environment and human friendly. And that composition being antimicrobial also kills
viruses such as SARS, MERS and COVID-19 on external surfaces., however they felt that filing
Intellectual Property Applications is nothing but confining knowledge; They had this broad
thought that Knowledge is to share and not to confine within one organization or one person.

The product of VIRO is a herbal composition used as disinfectant sanitizer and effective in
reducing a wide range of microbial populations comprising the DMSO, chloroform ,ethanol
,methanol ,and ethyl acetate extracts of Datura metel and Rosa indica (leaf and petal) Myristica
fragrans (nutmeg), Myristica fragrans HOUTT (mace), Citrus sinensis and Citrus limetta plant.
VIRO has been manufacturing the product in India, however were selling them in Pakistan,
China, Malaysia and Singapore.
Knowing that VIRO is manufacturing and selling similar product as that of NIRO; the IP team in
NIRO advised NIRO to enforce its Intellectual Property Rights and a Civil Suit is filed in the
District Court i.e., City Civil Court Hyderabad on 01/05/2020 by NIRO against VIRO for the
alleged Infringement of their Patent, Trademark, Copyright and Design Rights. Both NIROKILL
and VIROKILL logos are depicted below:

The products are also sold under the following packaging and the labels backside the cans are
depicted below:

Along with the civil suit NIRO also filed an application under Order XXXIX rule 1 and 2
seeking temporary injunction against VIRO from manufacturing the product, using the
Trademark labels and design of the can. The Civil suit is numbered as Original Suit (OS) No.
143 of 2020 and their interim application has been number as I.A. No.258 of 2020. After hearing
the counsels for NIRO, the District Judge at Hyderabad City Civil Court ordered urgent notices
to VIRO for their reply and posted the Interim Application I.A. No. 258 of 2020 to be heard on
06/07/2020 and the main suit is posted on 06/12/2020. Now, you are requested to prepare
arguments from both sides to be presented on 06/07/2020 for Interim Application. Assuming that
you are counsel for NIRO since you have all intellectual property rights protected how will you
place your arguments? Assuming that you are counsel for VIRO how do you defend them in this
Infringement suit.

HINTS FOR ARGUMENTS: FOR COUNSELS OF NIRO:

1) Patent is Granted - Section 48 provides to prevent make, use, sell, offer for sale or import the
product into India by the Patentee and hence Manufacturing (making) being done in India by
VIRO, it is an infringement of rights provided to them. Further NIRO has also filed applications
in Pakistan, China, Malaysia and Singapore which will eventually granted and the acts of
selling, offering for sale of product in those territories is also an infringement.

2) Trademark VIROKILL is similar to NIROKILL expect that N is replaced with V for similar
products is nothing but Infringement in India, since the mark is Registered to them. However
since it is yet to be Registered in Pakistan, China, Malaysia and Singapore and hence it is
Passing Off in those countries. Further the product being manufactured and labeled in INDIA it
is an infringement of Rights though it is not actually sold in India.

3) The marketing Literature and packaging of VIROKILL is looking similar to that of

NIROKILL and thus it is an infringement of copyrights in content developed and designed by
NIRO. As per Section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957 which provided the meaning of Copyright
i.e., even substantially if the works are similar it is infringement.

4) NIRO has adopted a unique shape of Design for its package- VIRO has also a unique shape
of design, however not exactly matching but both are not regular packaging - VIRO‟s package is
bit similar to NIRO packaging and hence it is infringement of Design rights of NIRO.

FOR COUNSELS OF VIRO:

1) a) The products of NIRO and VIRO are completely different though achieving the
similar objectives of killing viruses.

b) Even assuming but not admitting that the products are similar, VIRO is first to
develop such a product, the lab note books of VIRO and testing done by VIRO are much prior to
NIRO.

c) Respecting IPR of NIRO in India, VIRO is not selling its products in INDIA.

d) The Patent of NIRO is not valid Patent.

 e) In this Pandemic Situation where people are dying, the Patent law should take back
seat and companies like VIRO should be allowed to manufacture and distribute which helps
Pandemic situation to be controlled by governments. There are provisions similar to in India
Section 100, 101, 102 and 103 of Patent Act, 1970 which provide exemption for products
procured by Government/Government agencies it is exempted in all countries i.e., Pakistan,
China, Malaysia and Singapore also. VIRO has sold the product only to Government Department
and not others in the commercial market.

f) It is an essential product in this Pandemic Situation and hence no interim injunction

can be granted to NIRO instead FRAND principles can be adopted as is done for SEP‟s in case
NIRO succeed in its case.

2) The Trademark VIROKILL is adopted honestly based on their company name and the
objective of killing viruses by the product. It is also incidental that the intended purpose i.e.,
VIRUS KILLING (VIROKILL) is present in the mark. It is bonafide use of abbreviation of their
company name and cannot be termed as Infringement. Further the mark is in descriptive nature,
where courts held descriptive marks are not protected. Both NIROKILL and VIROKILL are
different and pronounced differently. No Product is sold by VIRO in India and thus no actual
infringement of Trademark Rights of NIRO. Passing Off suit is not maintainable as no actual
passing off happening in INDIA.

3) The packaging is done by VIRO in accordance with the labeling laws prevailing in the
Country and the products are similar obviously the content looks similar and there is no
copyright exists on the facts. Ideas are not protected under copyrights laws only expression of
Ideas are protected and hence the expression of VIRO is completely different than NIRO.
Further if there exists any copyright than it vests with VIRO as they developed and published the
content first.

4) The Design of packaging of both products are different and hence there cannot be any Design
Infringement.
 BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE, SANGLI

MOOT COURT ACTIVITY NO. II

MOOT PROBLEM 4

(Prof. Pallavi Mane)

United Bharat is unique in its contents and spirit. It consists of 28 states and 9 United Territories.
The state has the lengthiest constitution of the world providing an independent and impartial
judiciary, established parliamentary system of government and also guarantees fundamental
rights to citizen which are enforceable before court of law. The state is declared as secular,
socialist, sovereign, democratic, republic country under the preamble and its objectives are
social, economic, political justice, liberty, equality and fraternity The state is rich with natural
resources.

On 30th January 2020 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, a pandemic disease
was reported in United Bharat. The impact of coronavirus pandemic on the country has been
largely disruptive in terms of economic activity as well as a loss of human lives. All the sectors
were adversely affected. With the sudden increase of confirmed cases, the government of United
Bharat declared lockdown throughout the country to prevent the spread of this infectious disease.
The government of United Bharat also declared 'curfew' under section 144 of Criminal Procedure
Code of United Bharat. The enforcement agencies arrested and detained the violators.

Mr. Ashish Baiga is a migrant worker from the State of Bangla in United Bharat. He was
engaged in construction works in another State of “United Bharat” called Rashtra. He belonged
to a poor scheduled tribe family. He had aged parents, wife, two children and an unmarried sister
but he was the only bread winner of his family. During the lock down, Mr. Ashish Baiga lost his
job and in spite of several attempts, he could not  nd out a new job appropriate for him. So he
decided to travel back to his home State but transportation facilities were not available due to
lock down in Rashtra. So Mr. Ashish Baiga along with five other co-workers started their travel
to Bangla. These migrant workers chose to walk home along the railway tracks as train routes
were considered shorter than roads. They opted railway tracks as it is comparatively safer to
evade police so that they don't have to stop their travel in their midway. But this poor labour
class group had no suffcient money for meeting their basic needs during their travel. After two
days of travel, the labourers faced fatigue and lethargy because of sleeplessness, lack of rest and
less food and water intake. In spite of all these hurdles, the poor migrant workers moved forward
with strong determination.

They walked on tracks with confidence as they assumed that no trains would be running because
of the lock down. But on March 5th 2020, at night by 7 pm, they met with train accident. A
goods train at high speed ran over three migrant workers including Mr. Ashish Baiga resulting in
their death. The other three were severely injured out of whom one lost his right leg.
This incident raised attention in social media and raised national concern on the plight of migrant
workers during the outbreak of covid-19 pandemic. On an assessment of number of railway
accidents by NCRB, it was found that 805 people suffered injuries and 8,733 people died on
railway track between January 2020 and December 2020. Majority of the dead were migrant
workers. However, Indian railways declared that these are “not railway accidents” because they
come under the category of “untoward incidents” or “trespassing” and refused to pay
compensation to these migrant workers. They claimed that Indian Railways is not responsible for
the deaths of migrant workers MOOT PROBLEM and in fact the deaths are caused not by
“accidents” but by' trespassing”. They claimed that that it is a civic issue of concern and the
railway was not acting negligently and the railways has always made huge efforts in sensitizing
trespassers to avoid walking on tracks. The victims were given a very meagre compensation by
the State governments concerned. The Government of United Bharat also denied compensation
to the victims' families on the ground that it is impossible to compensate these many families as
the economic impact of Covid-19 pandemic in United Bharat has been largely disruptive.

Mr. Vishwam Nath, a social activist took up initiative to file a suit as public interest litigation
before Honourable Supreme Court of United Bharat under Article 32 of the Constitution of
United Bharat to bring in to attention the plight of migrant workers during Pandemic Covid 19
and to direct Central Government to pay reasonable compensation to the family of migrant
workers who met with railway accidents.

Now the case is pending before the Honourable Supreme Court of United Bharat:

II. DISCLAIMER:

The laws of United Bharat are in pari materia with the country India.
 BHARATI VIDYAPEETH’S NEW LAW COLLEGE, SANGLI

MOOT COURT ACTIVITY NO. II

MOOT PROBLEM 5

(Prof. Anita Patil)

The Republic of Indus (Indus)is a mid-sized developing country in the continent of Aria. Indus is
a secular quasi-federal republic as laid down in its 1960 constitution. The prime minister along
with its cabinet of ministers is responsible for deciding and supervising all military, economic
and general policies of the republic. In the year 2010, the prime mister of Indus introduced a new
economic policy which proved to be disastrous. As a result of this economic policy, there was
sharp increase in youth unemployment and inflation in the country hit an all- time high.

Sebastian Feldstone was born in New Bhave city of Indus in 1995. At a young age, he developed
interest in performing in stand-up comedy after brief stints in college productions. He appeared
on open-mic nights at various Improv Clubs around the city of New Bhave while attending
College. After graduation in 2015, he tried out at an open-mic night at the Bozobo Club playing
the character of an old actor who gives a social commentary on current affairs of the country.
The clip of this open-mic night went viral on all the social media platforms and he became a
media sensation.

Overnight all his shows were sold out. He was especially popular with the tech-savy younger
generations who found his comedy routines extremely relatable and funny. His social media
handles started getting a lot of young followers and due to his dry, sarcastic, funny videos on
social media platforms-he developed a dedicated fanbase.

In June 2019, Sebastian posted a video recording of his new comedy sketch on Youtube. In the
video, Sebastian is dressed up a out of work young actor who is angry with the government
because of rising unemployment in the country. This video got 20 million hits on Youtube and
got picked up by news channel.

In April of 2020, the entire republic of Indus along with the rest of the world went into a
lockdown caused by the spread of Covid-19 pandemic. The lockdown was lifted in December
2020. In January of 2021, Sebastian was performing at a college fest in front of a crowd of 1000
students when the police came to the festival and arrested him for „exciting dissatisfaction
towards the Government under Section 124 A of the Indus Penal Code, section 269 of the Indus
Penal Code (unlawful or negligent act likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to
life) and other relevant provisions. He was produced before the Sessions Court at New Bhave
and a bail was posted but the Magistrate rejected the contentions and bail was denied. To make
matters worse, it was reported that officials had openly expressed the fact that they didn't have
any evidence/video against the comedian and the Superintendent of Police Sneha Khai went on
record to say that it didn‟t really matter if Sebastian had not made the jokes that were the basis
for the arrests. The bail application was produced before the High Court where it was rejected
and Sebastian was sent to 2 weeks of judicial custody. Meanwhile an online petition was
launched by his fans challenging the obsolete sedition laws in the country. The petition gained a
lot of online traction and even caused small rallies of protest in colleges across India. The admin
of this online petition is a young college student leader, Alia Shawkat who asserted that sedition
laws of Indus which was promulgated during the colonial rule of Indus to tackle and control
popular freedom fighters and that the current government was using it to stifle dissent against the
economic policies of the government. In last three years, 5000 artists, comedians, actors and
performer have been arrested on the same grounds as Sebastian. The admin of this petition was
also arrested and sent to judicial custody for 14 days for inciting violence amidst student protests.
Her bail was also rejected.

Centre for Internet Freedom is a non-profit organisation which provides free legal aid to artists
arrested by the government on grounds of sedition has challenged the rejection of bail
application of both Sebastian Feldstone and Alia Shawkat as well as challenged the
constitutional validity of Section 124 A of IPC.

The participants are free to frame their own issues.

II. DISCLAIMER:

* The constitution and penal laws of the Republic of Indus are same to that of Republic of
India.