UILS Intra Department Moot

Court Competition, 2018

(28th to 30th September, 2018)

MOOT PROPOSITION (GROUP II)

 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
MOOT PROPOSITION

1. Praakrit is currently world’s largest democracy. The history of Praakrit is the history of class
struggle and history of revolution against British, Colonialism and Imperialism. After
independence, the People of Praakrit enacted Constitution which envisages the right to
equality, the right to freedom of belief, conscience, religion and the right to freedom against
discrimination on grounds of political or other opinion among other rights as fundamental to
‘human’ existence. Internationally, they have been codified in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (1948) and various other instruments such as the Covenant Civil and Political
Rights (1976).
2. Praakrit believes in freedom of expression and dissent forms a major part of democratic
debate.It is the irony of the oppressed masses that many a time in their struggle for the
realisation of the above mentioned collective and positive rights, these civil liberties are
blatantly violated by the State.
3. Sequoia is an intellectual supporting the rights of Maoists, and has no criminal record
whatsoever. He studied from Doon School and then graduated from London. He also has a
Phd from Oxford University. He believes in the rights of Maoists and empathises with them.
He has written several research papers and newspapers articles pointing out lacunas in State
Policy qua Maoists. Sequoia became member of Communist Party of Praakrit (CPP) (Maoist)
in 2010 and has attended a couple of meetings of CPP.
4. Sequoia was arrested in Sauramashtha in September 2012 on allegations of being a member
of the banned Communist Party of Praakrit (Maoist).In the incident of 2012, for which he
has now been arrested, Naxals had allegedly attacked one SF (Security Forces) camp in the
SOMBRORO Thermal Power station (STPS) police station area. Six persons were killed
and many others injured in the attack allegedly planned and executed by over 300 Naxals
at the SF camp. A series of bombs were exploded and the Naxals had allegedly resorted to
firing. It has been alleged by Police that he was present in one of the meetings in which
plans of Bombing was made. Sequoia has been booked under several sections of the Indian
Penal Code for Murder, and Rioting and under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
(Sections 10,13, and 16). All other persons, booked in that case have already been
acquitted or released on bail. A chargesheet is yet to be filed against Sequoia in this case
till date. He is the only person who is incarcerated in relation to above bomb blasts.
5. Sequoia, has been booked in seven cases in toto. He has already been acquitted in three
due to lack of evidence. He has spent several years in Sauramashtha prisons. The ‘septic
1|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
tank’ principle1 is continued as the basis for his secluded and segregated treatment. Not only
he is kept separate, but he is not allowed to meet relatives, no interviews and basic
necessities of life are also denied to him. The conditions of all political prisoners are same
in whole Praakrit.
6. It has been the policy of State since colonial times. From Lahore Conspiracy case (1929) till
emergency (1975), this principle is followed till date in Praakrit. With such an objective to
contain these so-called ‘dangerous’ ideologies, political prisoners are kept segregated,
secluded and isolated from the general mass of prisoners in Praakrit.
7. Following his ideal Bhagat Singh, a great Revolutionary Leader, he sat on indefinite
hunger strike in Jail along with 9 other inmates of similar ideology. Some of the demands
out of the 43 jail demands included the ‘bare necessities’ such as introduction of inside
interviews, improving educational, medical and sports facilities in jails, restoring Advisory
Boards for release of life convicts, wage increase for employed prisoners, etc.
8. Sequioa wrote a letter to the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission in
November 2017, he appealed to be treated like a political prisoner and not a convicted
criminal, “Out of 4 cases pending against me, the case in which charge sheet has been
filed…There is no charge of any criminal activity or criminal intent, which is normally
accompanied with charges under the UAPA,” he wrote. I have merely been put behind bars
for my views and my work amongst the poor, who comprise 80% of our people. Incidentally
the views (Maoist or Marxist) are not banned and freely available! Even the Supreme Court
on February 4, 2011, in the case of Arup Bhuyan2has held that mere membership of a banned
organisation will not make a person a criminal unless he resorts to violence or incites people
to violence. The Praakrit government routinely disregards this judgement and imprisons
many people for simply being members of such organizations and for having Marxist views”.
The Chairman of NHRC of Praakrit has supported release of Sequioa and other ‘Prisoners of
Conscience.’

1
Reginald Craddock, a British, propounded the concept ‘septic tank’ wherein such prisoners were to be isolated
to “keep the poisonous gas within the tank and ensure the safe custody of those emitting it”. During the British
rule such seclusion was practised through various methods such as transportation to the Andaman and Nicobar
Islands. In the brutal conditions of the cellular prisons of the Andamans, staunch nationalists and revolutionaries
were incarcerated for years on end in total isolation and solitude. Instances of such special treatment, have been
well documented in the memoirs of political prisoners who were incarcerated in the Andaman prisons such as
BhaiParmanad, VD Savarkar, TrailokyaNathChakraborty, Bijoy Kumar Sinha, etc
2
2011 3 SCC 377. The Hon’ble SC has distinguished between ‘advocacy’ and ‘incitement’. Building upon
doctrine of ‘Guilt by Association’ the Hon’ble SC has held that its incitement and resultant violence which is
essential for conviction. The State of Praakrit has time and again disputed the correctness of law laid down in
the above case.

2|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
9. NIA, however, has started conducting the investigation and it has issued a statement that
there is credible evidence that he is an active member and that investigation revealed minutes
of various meetings of CPP in which he was present. Since the investigation is still going on,
so no charge sheet has been filed yet, however, proper trial is taking place in other cases
against him.
10. Sequioa has been suffering with several ailments including an enlarged prostrate.His
lawyers and civil rights groups have demanded that he be produced before the designated
courts and the trial be commenced in each of them, instead of waiting for his release in one
case and then re-arresting him.
PART II
11. Justice Amar Shergill is a 67 year old human rights activist. He has worked his entire life for
the cause of human rights and humanity. He believes in the abolition of death penalty. He is
very active on social media and actively tweets and posts his views on the activities going on
in Praakrit. The Kiki News TV channel made the letter (Written by Sequoia to NHRC) public
and also showed the views of Chairman of NHRC. As usual, Justice Amar Shergill took up
the issue and posted his views on Facebook3 (ANNEXURE 1). The Facebook post stirred up
a debate in Praakrit and involved all political parties. This triggered an online movement for
release of Sequoia with users tweeting and posting with hashtag #ReleaseSequoia,
#MyCountryMyViews.
12. Next day, Justice Amar Shergill was arrested for having links with Sequoia and other Maoist
terrorists. A FIR was registered against him under section 153A, 153B of IPC. The police
flouted all the norms of arresting a judicial officer and put him behind the bars. He was also
served a Contempt Notice by Supreme Court.
13. The media enjoys freedom of speech and expression in Praakrit. The media showed the
Facebook Post in a manner that someone who sympathises with Sequoia is livid.A television
news channel compared him on to Lashkar-e-Tayiba founder Mohammad Sayeed.
14. This led some people in country to believe that Sequoia has challenged the Constitution and
had promoted armed resurrection, and that Justice Amar Shergill supports it. Meanwhile
demands of sequoia were not fulfilled and one of the fellow prisoners died. It was not at all
reported in print and electronic media.

3
Facebook is a social media platform. Any arguments on constitutional or privacy violations of Facebook shall
lead to deductions and shall not at all be acceptable.

3|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
15. "It is ridiculous," Sequoia’s lawyer said, "TV is helping whitewash the State's violence. There
is no comparison between the two. The Maoist movement is against State violence. TV
anchors, who do not believe in anything but provocative news, are defending the State's
unconstitutional acts. Are they not supporting violence themselves?"
16. Fearing that this media trial might impact fair trial of Sequoia and others, Sequoia with the
help of his lawyer filed a petition under Article 32 of Constitution alleging violation of Right
to Fair trial and prayed for a Gag Order. It was argued that does media have a right to report
whatever they please on the on the basis of police briefing, irrespective of the damage it
causes to reputation of accused?
17. The Hon’ble SC ordered postponement of the offending publication/broadcast or
postponement of reporting of certain phases of the trial till 4 months.
18. One news channel namely KiKi news channel, however, showed a one hour show on both
Justice Amar Shergill and Seqouia wherein it traced the historical background leading back to
7 generations of both of them. It broadcasted that both have common background wherein
their great grandfathers were leaders of revolt against Britishers in Deccan Plateau Area of
Sauramastha. The channel criticised the Marxist origins of Justice Amar Shergill and also
questioned the research of Sequoia. Both of them filed a petition under Article 226 in High
Court citing violation of right to be forgotten. The High Court awarded damages to them and
also ordered permanent injunction on the TV show. The TV channel appealed against this
and contended that there is no right to be forgotten in Praakrit and that HC has erred in law. It
also argued that it has not violated gag order.
PART III
19. The arrest of Justice Amar Shergill, Sequioa and other political prisoners raised hue and cry
amongst civil sections of society. A NGO by the name of VASUDEV KUTUMBKUM filed
a writ of habeus corpus in High Court of Sauramashtha praying release of Justice Amarbir
Shergill, Sequioaand other political prisoners. It was contended that the government follows
the same modus operandi in arresting and imprisoning most of these people: they are picked
up from various locations by plain clothes police without warrants and spirited away to
different states, produced in courts after several days, during which they are kept in police
custody in contravention to constitutional procedures and then charged under UAPA and
multiple criminal cases and remanded to police or jail custody. Thus begins a period of
prolonged imprisonment in which the legal right to bail of these people are denied, they are
shunted from state to state to stand trial in various cases and sometimes beaten or tortured in

4|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
police custody. All this is part of the state’s concerted attempt to annihilate the leadership of
the CPP (Maoist) and destroy what it considers to be the single greatest threat to itself and the
corporate interests it serves. Justice Amar Shergill also sought to quash the FIR by HC under
section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
20. The High Court of Sauramashtha ordered release of all the activists. It observed,
“People do not take up arms, in an organized fashion, against the might of the
State, or against fellow human beings without rhyme or reason. Guided by an
instinct for survival, and according to Thomas Hobbes, a fear of lawlessness that
is encoded in our collective conscience, we seek an order. However, when that order
comes with the price of dehumanization, of manifest injustices of all forms
perpetrated against the weak, the poor and the deprived, people revolt. That large
tracts of the State of Sauramashtha have been affected by Maoist activities is
widely known. It has also been widely reported that the people living in those
regions of Sauramashtha have suffered grievously, on account of both the Maoist
insurgency activities, and the counter insurgency unleashed by the State. The
situation in Sauramashthais undoubtedly deeply distressing to any reasonable
person. What was doubly dismaying to us was the repeated insistence, by
therespondents, that the only option for the State was to rule with an iron fist,
establish a social order in which every person is to be treated as suspect, and any
one speaking for human rights of citizens to be deemed as suspect, and a Maoist.”

21. The HC also sent a notice to Law Commission of Praakrit to look into an enabling legislation
which enacts the rights of political prisoners. The Hon’ble HC quashed the FIR against
Justice Amar Shergill.

22. Aggrieved by the order, the State of Sauramashtha has appealed to SC. It contends that the
detention of these prisoners is necessary in the interest of nation, sovereignty and integrity of
State. The speeches and published works of these so called scholars are anti-national and they
hurt the sentiments of Army. The expression of thought is intrinsically dangerous to the
public interests. It was argued that since these men are intellectuals and that they hold a
higher reputation, their words have a scintillating effect on rural masses of Sauramashtha.
23. Apart from the arguments raised in HC, the respondents argued that mere membership is not
sufficient for arrest and that there exists substantial difference between ‘incitement’ and
‘advocacy’. They also argued that right to fair trial is violated as no charge sheet is filed in
STPS case. Moreover, the arbitrary arrest of Sequoia since all these years is illegal and hence
State should pay compensation to Sequoia.

5|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
24. This whole scenario also raised the issue of right to freedom of belief and expression and
challenged the States authority to ‘arrest persons for political beliefs and activities not in
conformity with ideology and pseudo-nationalism sanctioned by State.’
25. Meanwhile an opposition leader named Mr. Kashi Garoor filed an application under Article
32 praying for guidelines by SC on recognising the category of political prisoners as per the
internationally recognised practices and norms in accordance with the UN covenant on
prisoners, to which the Government of India is a signatory.
26. The PIL also prays to treat political prisoners in accordance with the internationally
recognised principles, standards and conventions such as the UN Convention against Torture
and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which the government is
a signatory and the Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, 1977. In the event of
capture or arrest of combatants of armed resistance movements operating in India, they
should be recognised and declared as ‘prisoners of war’ and be treated in accordance with the
Geneva Convention to which India is a signatory.
27. It also prays that The Colonial Era Indian Prisons Act,1894 should be immediately scrapped
and replaced by an up-to-date one incorporating international HR standards and principles
and NHRC recommendations.
28. It further prays that an immediate end to all ‘false encounters’ and ‘disappearances’, which
are used as methods by the police and armed forces to eliminate political opponents, should
be enforced . Towards this end, it should be made ‘mandatory to register FIRs, whenever an
encounter death takes place’, so that it ‘would be the [judicial] magistrate and not the police
who would have the power to decide whether to continue the trial or close the case
29. The State is contending maintainability of this PIL and questions the locus standi of Mr.
Kashi Garoor. The SC has clubbed the appeal and PIL. Since the News Channel Case also
originates from similar facts involving similar transaction, the SC has decided to hear News
Channel Case along with above matters as it will further the interests of justice and will help
in decide issue at hand conclusively. Argue from both sides.

1. The laws of Praakrit are parimateria with laws of India.

2. The characters of this Proposition are imaginative. Any resemblance to any living
person is purely incidental.
3. The participants are free to argue upon additional issues.
4. It shall be highly appreciated if participants submit well researched memorials.
5. Sauramastha may be taken as Red corridor or Red Belt Area as is known is India.

6|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
ANNEXURE I

“During this decade long period hundreds of other men and women have been arrested and
thrown into prisons all over Praakrit, where they have been spending years behind bars, not
because they have committed crimes such as murder or robbery or rape, but because they
have responded to the call of their conscience to end oppression and exploitation in society.
The goondas sitting in the central government and various state governments of Praakrit are
so worried about their activities that it is unthinkable that they can remain free, and making
them rot in jail for year after year has become a mainstay of state policy. There is no
independence. The colour of goondas has changed. Earlier we were looted and jailed by
white goondas of Britain, now they are brown and black. It is unprecedented in recent
history that such a large number of people accused of political offences have been
imprisoned for such prolonged periods of time by a state which claims to be democratic,
Gandhist and which is officially not at war.

Historically these laws have included the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act
(TADA), Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and their latest avatar, the Unlawful Activities
Prevention Act (UAPA), which was amended a number of times in the last decade to give it
more teeth and make it more draconian. It has been observed that each of these laws have led
to gross violations of human rights by broadening the definition of “terror” or “unlawful
activities” to criminalize political dissent and by reversing the presumption of innocence
which is the bedrock of the criminal justice system.
Further, existing provisions for bail and examination of evidence are ‘amended’ so as to
ensure incarceration and convictions as in the case of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Act
(TADA), Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA), Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act
((MCOCA), etc. Once arrested and put into prison, the stigmatization and persecution of
such a political rebel continues. Such jails become centres of torture and the rights of the
now imprisoned rebel are denied or compromised on the pretext of security. Any remaining
spirit of rebellion or self-respect is now sought to be crushed in the prisons’ daily humiliating
conditions. Such an activist or individual is continuously kept in prolonged incarceration by
implicating him/her in numerous cases under special laws or by re-arresting after acquittals.

He strongly advocated for release of Sequioa and other political prisoners and remarked,
“They seek to expose the hollowness of the States’ laws that consider these selfless & pro-
people ‘acts’ as ‘offences’. They seek to expose the States’ brand of democracy that

7|Page
 INTRA DEPARTMENT MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018
28TH – 30TH September, 2018
suppresses political dissent and imprisons its political opponents. These political
requirements have been the primary reasons behind the demand for political prisoner-hood.

“A man is innocent until proven guilty, but in Sequioa’s case, nothing has been proven
against him in all these years,” HOW can you deny anybody a fair trial?” he also criticised
the policy of Salwajudum and examined the role of Praakrit’s judiciary. He remarked, “The
Human-Rights approach of Supreme Court has resulted into development of Prison
Jurisprudence under Article 21 r/w Aricle 14 and 19. However, I would like to add that since
after Maneka Gandhi4, SC has always upheld so called anti-terrorist laws. Our SC only
knows how to declare rights but when it comes to application of those rights, the court has
always upheld the statutes to ultra vires challenge. This has given impetus to State goondas
to enact draconian laws and thus, court has lost opportunities to promote human rights
jurisprudence vis-à-vis terrorism. In 2005 the Supreme Court of India sentenced a man to
death, not based on evidence by the admission of the learned justices themselves, but to
“satisfy the collective conscience of society”.”

Only Print if Necessary #Savepaper #SwachchBharat

4
Maneka Gandhi v Union of India AIR 1978 SC 597 is a landmark judgment of SC of Praakrit. The 9 judge
bench of SC over ruled the case of AK Gopalan, thus giving impetus to ‘living school’ interpretation of
constitution. The judgment led to development of new civil rights jurisprudence in consonance with concept of
welfare state and globally accepted notions of constitutionalism. The human rights activists consider it as Magna
Carta of Civil Rights.

8|Page