MOOT COURT, EXERCISE & INTERNSHIP

WRITTEN ARGUEMENTS
(STATE V. MUKESH)

PREPARED BY

MUKESH NARAYAN

ROLL NO.-136

SECTION -A

CAMPUS LAW CENTRE

 WRITTEN ARGUEMEMNTS FOR CRIMINAL TRIAL

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NEW DELHI

Cr. Case No. /2017

STATE VERSUS MUKESH

WRITTEN ARGUEMNTS

It is respectfully submitted on behalf of the above named Accused/Applicant that

this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to acquit him in consideration of the following
facts and grounds: -

BRIEF FACTS

Mukesh, son of Rajesh and married to Monika, mother of two children, Sanjay and
Sonia. Mukesh, on 1st January, outside 345 Green Park was charged for voluntarily
causing grievous hurt by damaging her right eye and thereby caused her to be in
severe bodily pain for a period of twenty days.

As per the statement of Monika, Mukesh had assaulted her many times before and
she reported the matter to the police but refused to make statement reasons best
known to her and she explains that the fight was always about money. Policemen
Satinder always attended to her complaint.

Monika discovered that her husband was having an affair with a wealthy divorcee
who runs a health club and had set her sights on her husband. The problem started
on the eve of Christmas and Monika decided to allow Mukesh to spend some time
with the children and Mukesh deliberately did not return the children until 10 a.m.
on 31st December to 10 a.m. on 1st January.

The scuffle ensued when Mukesh came to return the children and when Monika
reached to take Sonia by extending her arms, Mukesh with his left hand punched
her in right eye. The car keys which Mukesh had in his hands went into the eye of
Monika damaging her right eye. Mukesh and Roshni guiltily fled. Monika called
the police immediately.

ISSUE:

Whether on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case Mukesh can be
prosecuted for causing grievous hurt to Monika by badly damaging her right eye
and thereby caused her to be in severe bodily pain for a period of twenty days.

GROUNDS:

1. That the Applicant is quite innocent and this case is false and fabricated by
the police officials and police subordinate due to enmity.

2. That statement made by the Monika mentions about Monika being assaulted
by Mukesh many times before and also about the occasions on which she
reported the matter to the police but refused to make statement reasons best
known to her.

3. That Statement made by Monika clearly states that the keys which Mukesh
had in his hands went into the eye of Monika and this clearly suggests that
there was no deliberate intention on the part of the accused to harm the
victim.

4. That this was the first Christmas after being separated from his children
created an irrestible desire to meet his children after being separated for a
long time.

5. That Roshni is very rich and has all the means and resources to provide to
the children and the affinity shown by the children towards her makes the
 victim jealous and to have a grudging feeling towards both Mukesh &
Roshni.
6. That accused has no previous convictions against him, though there are
false accusations and insinuations by the victim without having any valid
proof to substantiate the charges.

7. That the accused is a law abiding citizen. He has never indulged in any
illegal activities.

8. That the accused from all accounts is an innocent person.

Antecedents of a person play a significant or important role in knowing about

the personal attitude, behavioral approach and vulnerability emotional
disturbances and handling of situations peculiar to humans.

This case pertains to accusations or insinuations made by the accused to the

victim and have made an attempt to falsely implicate the accused for reasons
best known to her.

During Cross-examination of the Victim, the victim admitted the fact she had
been convicted thrice for shop lifting and also fined by the magistrate for
breaking all the windows of a local health club.

Also, the fact that the statement of S.I. Satinder should be considered in which
he states “On arriving at her home, 345 Green Park, she was angry & tearful.
Her children were crying, pleading to allow keeping some presents.

This clearly shows that who shares more affinity towards their children.

The Statement made by Monika clearly states that the keys which Makes
had in his hands went into the eye of Monika and this clearly suggests that there
was no deliberate intention on the part of the accused to harm the victim.

As per S.I. Santander, it could be inferred that the accused was regretting the
sequence of events and the scuffle which ensued, the injury which accidently
 caused to the victim and d the desire of a father to meet his children after a long
time.

Also, the fact that victim was hysterical as per the statement of Roshni and
the past records, behavior and the circumstances under which the whole
incident took place points to the manner in which victim handles any and every
issue in a similar manner.

The victim was also angry at the presents received by her children form the
accused and the same has been corroborated in the statement made by the S.I
Satinder.

There is no law which prevents two divorced individuals from being in love with
each other and also the fact that Roshini has all the means and resources required
for a better upbringing of the children.

Also, the fact that Roshini had admitted during examination that Mukesh was sorry
for what he did and regretted the fact that he had to hit the victim and that it was
instinctive, an accident.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
be pleased to acquit him, under the circumstance and facts mention above, in the
interest of Justice.

NEW DELHI ACCUSED/APPLICANT

DATE______ THROUGH

ADVOCATE