INTERNSHIP REPORT

A REPORT

SUBMITTED TO
CAMPUS LAW CENTRE, FACULTY OF LAW

DELHI UNIVERSITY

IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF

LL.B.

UNDER THE SUPERVISION SUBMITTED BY: MUKESH PUSH

ADV. RAVI PRAKAS EXAM ROLL NO: 150337

CLASS ROLL NO: 155380
SUBJECT CODE: LB-501
SECTION: ‘D’
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have received help and encouragement from my friends and number of people
on completing this report and would like to take this opportunity to thank them
all.

It is my proud privilege to express my sincere gratitude to Advocate RAVI

PRAKASH under whose shadow and guidance I have successfully completed
my internship.

STUDENT’S NAME

MUKESH PUSHPAM
 DECLARATION
This report is the original work prepared by MUKESH PUSHPAM, a Student
of campus law center, faculty of law, Delhi University, Delhi, Semester-5 th in
fulfillment of requirement for internal assessment under the supervision of my
teacher.

Neither the said work, nor any part thereof has earlier been submitted to any
University or institution for the award of any degree or diploma.

STUDENT’S NAME
MUKESH PUSHPAM
CONTENT
 Introduction

 Importance of legal internship

 List of Cases

PART I
COURT EXPERIENCE
 General Observation of functioning of DISTRICT COURTS and SUPREME
COURT

 Court diary

PART II
 EXPERIENCE DURING CHAMBER PROCEEDING
 INTRODUCTION
This report examines the internship program with Advocate RAVI PRAKASH.
My internship with Advocate started from 01.07.2017 to 01.07.2017 has
immensely been a commendable learning experience for me. The internship
delivered me insight look of the society through the medium of court practice,
where I dealt with people directly to look into their problems under the
guidance of my senior and other associates with the help of them I was able to
complete my internship. I visited different District Courts, High Court as per the
different matters fixed in courts in daily routine. Where I got an opportunity to
appear before the Hon’ble Judges and Magistrates.

There is rule of law in our society followed in courts, is an aspect equality

before the law which suggest that no person is above law and that every person,
whatever be his rank or condition, is subject to jurisdiction of ordinary courts.

Rule of law requires that no person shall be subject to harsh, uncivilized or

discriminatory treatment even when the object is the securing of paramount
exigencies of law and order.
 REPORT ON COURT EXPERIENCE

The INTERNSHIP PROGRAMME with ADVOCATE RAVI

PRAKASH started from 01.07.2017 to 01.07.2017 has been an immensely
commendable experience for me On my 1st day of internship I reported to Mr.
Ravi Prakash who asked me to read a case file which was listed for hearing the
very next day. It was a bail application in which accused was charged under
section 379,353,120B & 34 of IPC and under certain other sections of Motor
Vehicle Act 1988. After reading the file and making notes of it I went to sir’s
chamber where he asked me about the facts and issues involve in the case. I told
him the brief facts as well as the legal issues involved in the case. At last he asked
me about the ingredients of the provisions involved in the case to which I was not
able to give correct answer. Then he asked me to bring the bare acts from outside
and make me read the provisions .He told me that this is your first lesson in this
profession ‘Always keep a Bare Act with you while you are reading a case file and
go through the provision then and there itself, it will enhance your knowledge of
applicability of law’.

After that whenever I used to read a case file I always kept Bare Acts with me
and used to go through it wherever the provisions where in question .

Every evening one of the juniors of Mr. Ravi Prakash used to prepare a cause list
of cases which were to be taken up next morning at the Court. After the cause list
was prepared file was used to be piled up near sir’s chamber .

Everyday I used to reach Mr. Ravi Prakash’s chamber at around 8:00am and used
to leave the chambers at around 8:00 pm and read 2-3 case files which were listed
before the different Court next . I also used to make notes of the case files which I
used to read everyday which includes brief facts of the case, legal issues involved
in it , provisions of law which was applied in that particular case, arguments raised
from our side , case laws if any cited in that petition/application and finally prayer
raised in that case. After writing it down I used to get it checked either from my
senior or if he was busy from any of his juniors.

At some occasions I was given the opportunity to be part a of client

dealings/meetings where I learnt how to deal with the clients. At every meeting my
senior used to make the client feel comfortable and asked him to tell everything
about the case without concealing any fact from him otherwise if any new fact
come before the court later on it will only prejudice his own case. And he used to
give just and proper legal advice to the client which is for his benefit. He don’t
used to unnecessarily force the client to go for litigations in court if any other
alternative remedy is available to him by which matter can be resolved outside the
court like mediation centres etc. He used to give full time to the clients so that
he/she can clear all doubts about the reliefs which he/she can get through the court.
CASES OBSEREVED

S.NO. LIST OF CASES PAGE

NO.

1. State Vs. Mohit Dukhiya & Ors.

2. Arun K. Vs Prahlad singh Ghasotiya
3. State Vs. Chaudhary Deepak Dasanan
4. Arujan kumar Vs. Trilok chand Nathi
5. Ankit Vishal Tyagi Vs. Pushpa Bajaj
6. State Vs. Shiv Shankar Munda & Ors.
7 State Vs Faisal
8 HARVINDER SINGH V. GURMEET KAUR
CASE-1

IN THE COURT OF MS. RUBY NAHAR, LD. M.M., TIS HAZARI

COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE VS. Mohit Dukhiya &

Ors..

That on 05.12.2012, three accused persons namely, Mohit Dukhiya ,Nitin Rana
and Jagminder @ Jagga Bhai intentionally collided with the vehicle (i.e. Four
Wheeler Honda City) of complainant at Gulabi Bagh. Nitiin Gupta who was
coming from Chandni Chowk, then accused persons started scuffling with the
complainant in furtherance to commit robbery with the complainant but the
local public present there came in between and made hold of accused persons.
The complainant dialed 100 number. Police was called at the spot who took the
complainant to Hospital for medical and after obtaining medical report and
statement of the complainant was recorded. After that FIR was registered at P.S.
Gulabi Bagh, Delhi. In this matter robbery was attempted but not done. No
article was involved to be robbed off, so sections of robbery were not included
in FIR. Now the matter is in court at the stage of prosecution evidence.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:

323, 341, 506, 34 IPC

OBSERVATION:

All the accused persons were on bail and they were present before the court
with counsel and the matter was fixed for prosecution evidence. As the
complainant was not present, so a next date of hearing was given and court
notice was issued for the appearance of the complainant.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING
CASE-2

IN THE COURT OF SH. SUNIL KUMAR, LD. METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF

Arun K.
COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

Prahlad singh Ghasotiya …ACCUSED

FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. That the complainant and the accused were having visiting terms with
each other from the last since three years.

2. That the accused had approached the complainant and requested him for a
friendly loan as the accused was facing financial crisis and the
complainant being a kind hearted person acceded to his request and gave
the loan of Rs.5,00,000/- as required by the accused in the month of May,
2014 and the accused assured the complainant to return the entire loan
amount within six months.

3. That in the due course of time, the accused again approached the
complainant in the month of July, 2014 with the successive demand of
Rs.5,00,000/- and the complainant again acceded to his request and gave
the loan of Rs.5,00,00/- as required by the accused in the month of July,
2014 and the accused assured the complainant to return the entire loan
amount of Rs.10,00,000/- till December, 2014.

4. That thereafter the complainant in discharge of his liability issued two

cheques No.684650 dated 10.12.2014 of Rs.5,00,000/- and cheque
No.684651 dated 16.12.2014 of Rs.5,00,000/- both drawn on Punjab
National Bank, Branch Subzi Mandi, Delhi-110007 and the accused
 assured to the complainant that the said cheques will be encashed on its
presentation and the accused is having sufficient funds in his account for
the encashment of the said cheques.

5. That thereafter the complainant presented the abovesaid cheques with his
banker namely Oriental Bank of Commerce, Derawal Nagar Branch,
Delhi-110009 but the complainant was shocked and surprised when the
said cheques were returned dishonoured with remarks “PAYMENT
STOPPED BY DRAWER” vide bank returning memos both dated
20.12.2014.

6. That the complainant apprised the accused about the factum of the said
cheques and the accused tendered apology and requested the complainant
to give sometime and present the said cheques again and the complainant
again, as per the assurances of the accused, presented the said cheques
with his abovenamed banker but this time also the abovesaid cheques
were returned as unpaid/ dishonoured with the same remarks
“PAYMENT STOPPED BY DRAWER” vide bank returning memo both
dated 03.03.2015.

7. That the complainant again informed the fate of the abovesaid cheques to
the accused but the accused instead of paying the amount of dishonoured
cheques started avoiding the complainant on one pretext or other with a
view not to make the payment of the said dishonoured cheques which
shows that the intention of the accused were not bonafide since its
beginning.

8. That thereafter the Complainant issued a legal notice dated 30.03.2015

through his counsel vide Speed Post upon the accused which was actually
sent on 31.03.2015. In the said notice the complainant has demanded
from the accused the payment against the aforesaid dishonoured cheques
within 15 days from the date of receipt of same. The said notice was duly
served/ delivered upon the accused on 06.04.2015 as is clear from the
tracking event of the speed post obtained through internet. But the despite
the service of the legal notice, the accused neither replied nor complied
with the terms of the said legal notice.

9. That the abovementioned facts makes it abundantly clear that the accused
has mischievously and intentionally issued the aforesaid cheques with
ulterior motives and thereafter with a view to grab the hard earned money
of the complainant issued stopped payment instructions to his banker and
thus the accused has committed an offence punishable U/s 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for which the prescribed punishment is
 with the imprisonment for a term which may be extended to two years or
with fine which may be extended to twice of the dishonoured cheques
amount or with both.

10. That thereafter the complainant filed the case U/s 138 of N.I. Act for the
dishonour of cheque within stipulated period praying therein to summon,
try and punish the accused in the present case.

SECTION INVOLVED:

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

OBSERVATION:

The complainant was present with the counsel and his pre-summoning evidence
was tendered by the complainant by way of affidavit, thereby statement of the
complainant was recorded. Accordingly M.M. issued summons for the
appearance of accused.

.
CASE-3

IN THE COURT OF SH. DINESH BHATT, LD. ASJ, TIS HAZARI

COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE VS. Chaudhary Deepak Dasanan

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

That on 23.03.2016, wife of accused namely Roshni committed suicide and she
left behind a suicide note in which she has written the name of his husband i.e.
accused in present matter namely Chaudhary Deepak Dasanan. Allegations
leveled in suicide note were of cruelty and harassment against accused on the
basis of statement of sister of deceased FIR was registered and the accused was
arrested and at present accused is in judicial custody.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:

498A/304B/306 IPC

OBSERVATION:

Accused was produced from the judicial custody with counsel, matter was fixed
for arguments on charge. Arguments on charge were heard. Resulting thereof
charges were amended/modified to section 306 IPC only and the charges were
altered as suicide note did not had any allegations of dowry demand. Now the
matter is fixed for Prosecution Evidence.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING
CASE-4

IN THE COURT OF MS. KIRAN GUPTA, LD .SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,

ROHINI COURTS, DELHI

ARJUN KUMAR …
PLAINTIFF

vs.

Trilok chand Nathi …DEFENDANT

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

Plaintiff and defendants were having business relations and plaintiff is the
supplier of raw materials and that is being used for packaging.

That defendant is running factory of manufacturing spare parts of car and

plaintiff has supplied him boxes in the month of October, 2014 for the purpose
of packaging and the plaintiff has raised the bill for the amount of Rs.55,000/-
that is unpaid by the defendant, for the recovery of which, the plaintiff has sued
the defendant.

OBSERVATION:

Matter was fixed for final arguments. Counsel for plaintiff argued at length in
which he appreciated statements of witnesses and matter was adjourned for
further arguments as the defendant sought adjournment on the reason that main
counsel is not available.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING
CASE-5

IN THE COURT OF MS.SHEFALI SHARMA, CIVIL JUDGE, ROHINI

COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

ANKIT VISHAL TYAGI

…PLAINTIFF

VS.

PUSPA BAJAJ …
DEFENDANT

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

In this case plaintiff is landlord and defendant is tenant, plaintiff has filed suit
for possession with the prayer to court to put the plaintiff in possession and
discontinue tenancy as the defendant has not made payment of arrears of rent
from last six months.

OBSERVATION:

In this matter plaintiff and defendant appeared before the Hon’ble Court with
their respective counsel. Matter was fixed for filing or written statement of
defendant to that effect. written statement was filed and was taken on record and
the matter was adjourned for framing of issues/admission/denial.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 04.08.2016

CASE-6

IN THE COURT OF SH. VIDYA PRAKASH, LD. ASJ, ROHINI

COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE VS. Shiv Shankar Munda &

Ors.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

That on intervening night of 08/09.09.2013, a murder was committed in the

park of C.C. Colony , Model Town, Delhi, then in the morning of 09.09.2013 a
passerby namely Surjeet called at 100 number regarding a dead body lying at
Ramleela Park, C.C. Colony, Delhi, thereafter enquiry was conducted by the
Police Officers that arrived at spot, body of deceased was identified as Kamlesh
by her relatives. Her relatives were called at spot and their statements were
recorded giving effect to FIR No.258/13 U/s 302 IPC, P.S. Model Town.
Afterwards on the secret information of reliable sources, police arrested juvenile
namely Nato. On his disclosure other accused namely Shiv Shankar and Gaurav
were arrested by the police on 15.09.2016 and other recoveries were also made
at their instance related with murder. Juvenile was facing trial at Juvenile
Justice Board, BBM Depot, Dr. Mukherjee Nagar. Whereas two accused Shiv
Shankar and Gaurav are facing trial before this Court.

OBSERVATION:

Both the accused persons were produced from judicial custody with counsel.
Matter was fixed for prosecution evidence. Investigating Officer of the case
namely Jagminder Dahiya, Inspr. P.S. Model Town was examined and cross
examined. Then further cross examination was deferred due to no time left with
the court and the next date of hearing was given for further cross examination.

JUDGMENT/ORDER: PENDING
CASE-7

IN THE COURT OF SH. V.K. BANSAL, LD. ASJ, ROHINI COURTS,

DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

STATE VS. FAISAL

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

That on 08.07.2016 accused namely Faisal with his friends entered into
altercation with police officials at Ashok Vihar, Near Water Tank, where
accused persons gave beatings to the police officials, due to which police
officials were admitted in Deep Chand Bandhu Hospital, Bharat Nagar, delhi
and their statements were recorded, resulting thereof FIR was registered at P.S.
Bharat Nagar, U/s 186/353/34 IPC. Accused Faisal managed to ran away from
the spot and he was apprehending his arrest in this case, due to which he filed
anticipatory bail.

SECTION INVOLVED:

438 Cr.P.C.

Offence committed Under sections 186/353/34 IPC

GENERAL OBSERVATION:

Arguments were heard at length. Reply to the application was filed by the IO of
the case and the counsel for accused/applicant managed the court to appreciate
that the applicant is falsely implicated and the bail was granted.

STATUS:

Trial is yet to commence. Application was allowed. Bail was granted to the
applicant.
CASE-8

IN THE COURT OF MS. TANVI KHURANA, M.M., TIS HAZARI

COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

SH. HARVINDER SINGH …

COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

SMT. GURMEET KAUR & ANR. …ACCUSED

PERSONS

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

1. That the complainant and the accused no.2 are known to each other as
they had friendly relations and used to visit each other at their respective
houses frequently.

2. That in the month of November, 2015, the accused persons approached

the complainant with a request for friendly loan of Rs.13,00,000/-
(Rupees Thirteen Lacs only) for a period of six month. The complainant
accepted their request and agreed to give/ advance the accused persons
the said loan of Rs.13,00,000/- and accordingly advanced the said asked
friendly loan amount of Rs.13,00,000/- to the accused persons. The
accused persons promised to repay the abovesaid loan amount of
Rs.13,00,000/- to the complainant after the expiry of six months period
i.e. upto April, 2016.

3. That after much persuasion and repeated requests by the complainant, the
accused persons lame excuses that at present they were not in a capacity
to repay the loan amount whereas the accused persons assured the
complainant that in the month of June, 2016 part liability amounting to
Rs.6,00,000/- will be cleared.

4. That in partial discharge of their abovesaid lawful legally enforceable

liability/debt, the accused no.2 for herself and for accused no.1 issued a
 cheque bearing No.511060 dated 03.06.2016 for Rs.6,00,000/- drawn on
State Bank of India, Village & Post Office Palla, Delhi-110036 in favour
of the complainant and assured the complainant that the said cheque will
be positively honoured on its presentation with the bank but on
presentation, the said cheque was got dishonoured and against the said
cheque bearing No.511060, the complainant has already filed a complaint
case U/s 138 of N.I. Act which is pending before the Hon’ble Court of
Ms. Tanvi Khurana, Ld. M.M., Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

5. That thereafter the complainant contacted the accused persons and

apprised them about the dishonour of the said cheque but instead of
paying the amount of dishonoured cheque, the accused no.1 issued
another cheque bearing No.024105 dated 10.08.2016 of Rs.6,00,000/-
drawn on State Bank of India, Village Palla Branch, Delhi from the joint
account of the accused persons bearing No.30166112373, duly signed by
both the accused persons in discharge of partial legally enforceable joint
liability and assured the complainant that the said cheque will be
honoured on its presentation.

6. That the complainant as per the assurances and promises of the accused
persons, deposited the abovesaid said cheque bearing No.024105 with
his bank namely Allahabad Bank, Branch Burari, Delhi-110084, having
Account No.50331155059 but this time also, the said cheque returned
back unpaid as dishonoured to the complainant with same remarks
“FUNDS INSUFFICIENT” vide returning memo dated 25.08.2016.

7. That thereafter the complainant contacted the accused persons apprised

them about the dishonour of the said cheque but they instead of paying
the amount of dishonoured cheque started avoiding the complainant to
make the payment of the abovesaid cheque on one pretext or other.

8. That under compelling circumstances, the complainant sent a legal

demand notice dated 30.08.2016 (posted on 09.09.2016) through his
counsel by way of Speed Post. In the said notice, the complainant has
demanded from the accused persons the payment against the aforesaid
dishonoured cheque within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of
same. The legal notice was duly served/delivered upon the accused
persons on 10.09.2016, but despite the service/receipt of the legal notice,
the accused persons neither replied the legal notice nor complied the
terms of the same and failed to make the payment of the dishonoured
cheque till date. Hence the present complaint.
9. That the accused persons were fully aware about the fact that they had no
sufficient balance in their joint account to honour the said cheque but
despite this fact, the accused persons in order to cheat the complainant
had issued the above referred cheque and thus both of them have
committed thereby an offence punishable U/s 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 as amended upto date, for which, the prescribed
punishment is imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or
with fine which may extend to twice of dishonoured cheque amount or
with both.

10. It was prayed in the complaint that the accused be summoned, tried and
punished for the abovesaid offence.

SECTION INVOLVED:

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

OBSERVATION:

Despite the service of the summons upon the accused, the accused did not
appear before the court and hence Non Bailable Warrants were issued against
the accused for is non appearance.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING
 EXPERIENCE DURING THE CHAMBER
PROCEEDING
The District Court in reality is different from the court generally shown in the
Movies. In movies the job of lawyer is more similar to a detective which is a far
cry from the reality. The job of a lawyer is only to assist a party in a suit
regarding the proceedings and appear before Judge on his behalf. Every lawyer
maintains a court diary, which proved handy and very useful as all the details of
the case are entered in the diary with proper date and its petition number. It
proves to be useful, as respective cases are recorded by the lawyer date wise and
it saves time to think and search of the cases as per the present date. During my
internship, I learned to maintain the lawyer’s diary. I learned how to take dates
from the court from the registers. I myself has submitted an application of non-
appearance on behalf of my Sir before the Hon’ble Judge. It was a learning
experience as Juniors take one year for learning the court proceedings which I
could learn during the period of internship. Though two months was not
sufficient but it was enough to learn about the basis. Basics can be learned only
in trial court. I have learned the basics of drafting. I could get to know about
Fast Track Court and Lok Adalat which is an emerging concept. I really tried
hard to learn. It was adventurous for me as everything was unpredictable. Every
client comes with a new case, new situation, a new problem and which doesn’t
have any perfect answer. I also experienced the expressions and thoughts of the
Hon’ble Judges. When they are in good mood, they will tell you how to do the
things correctly but if not then they will scold you for the simple mistakes you
have done. About advocates I experiences that it is not easy to work as an
advocate, it requires a lot of dedication and hard work, only then you can
achieve success, and most importantly social recognition.
This was a common practice among all advocates to never come on time and
keep their clients waiting before the court. They also would never present W.S.
(written statement) before the court on time, and also the witness on time, and
then ask the court to issue a further date for next hearing. In the office I learned
all the official work, filing Talwana, Vakalatnama etc. All these documents are
very important and an advocate must know how to fill them and use them,
Talwana is used for many things such as for issuing attach warrant, issuing
notices etc.

I also learned that it is very important to be always reading cases and new
enactments, keep yourself always sound minded, and while dealing with a case
read the facts of the case very carefully and try to find all the loopholes and then
use them in your favour, also while cross questioning with the witness never
allow him/her to be confident ask them twisted questions so that they become
nervous and are not able to answer properly.