5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2015

___________________________________________________________________________
Before
THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
___________________________________________________________________________
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
[UNDER ARTICLE 134 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA]
Criminal Appeal No. ______ / 2015
AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 15.03.2015
PASSED BY
THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
IN THE MATTER OF

Ms. Vijay Gupta

State of Rajasthan

&

&
v.

Others
(Appellants)

Brij Mohan Sharma

(Respondents)

MEMORIAL FOR THE APPELLANTS

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

TABLE OF INDEX
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES __________________________________________4
Judicial Decisions ____________________________________________________4
Books ______________________________________________________________5
Statutes _____________________________________________________________5
Dynamic Links _______________________________________________________6
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION _____________________________________7
SYNOPSIS OF FACTS ________________________________________________8
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS _________________________________________12
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ____________________________________________14
1. Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta & Laxmi Gupta should be convicted under Sec 498A and
304B of Indian Penal Code? ______________________________________________14
2. Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta should be charged u/s 302 of I.P.C and the sentence be
enhanced accordingly?___________________________________________________21
3. Whether Mr. Vijay Pal Singh should be convicted under section 376 and section 302
r/w34 of IPC?____________________________________________________________25
4. Whether the sentence awarded by Hon,ble High Court to respondent Juvenile,
Bahadur

be

upheld?

________________________________________________________________29
5. Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Statutory Auditor and Tax
Auditor? ______________________________________________________________30
6. Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Tax Auditor? _____________33
[Link] did the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur not file writ before
the High Court in the case of the Company for levying maximum penalty and why he

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
has not sanctioned prosecution u/s. 276C, 277, 277A, 278, 278B etc. of the I.T. Act,1961?
_______________________________________________________________35
PRAYER_______________________________________________________________37

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
1. State of Karnataka v David Rozario, 2002 Cri LJ 4127 (SC)
2. Rajeevan v. State of Kerala (2003) SC 1813
3. Sharad Bircichand Sarda v State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622
4. State of Maharashtra v Vasant Shankar Mhasane, 1993 Cr LJ 1134 (Bom)
5. Mukul Rani Varshnei v DDA (1995) 6 SCC 120: 1995 SCC(Cri) 1049
6. M.K. Antony v. State of U.P. (1985) SC 48
7. Appasaheb And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 January, 2007, Appeal (crl.) 1613
of 2005
8. Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484
9. State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal & Anr. [(1994) 1 SCC 73]
10. Manju Ram Kalita v. State of Assam [(2009) 13 SCC 330]
11. Ramaswamy v Dasari Mohan, AIR 1998 SC 774
12. State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Samman Das, AIR 1972 SC 677 - (1972) 3 SCR 58
13. Sanwat Singh vs. State of Rajasthan, (1961) 3 SCR 120
14. Ajit Savant Majagavi vs State Of Karnataka, AIR 1997, SC 3255
15. Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P., AIR (1990) SC 79
16. State of UP v Virendra Prasad, AIR 2004, SC 1517
17. State v Dinkar Bandu (1969) 72 Bom LR 405
18. State of Punjab v Sucha Sing AIR 2003 SC 1471
19. Chhotka v State of WB, AIR 1958 Cal 482
20. Jarnail Sing v State of Punjab AIR 1996, SC 755
21. State of Rajasthan v Madho, AIR 1991 SC 1065
22. State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, (1992) Crl LJ 1104
23. Hanumant Govind Nargundkar v. State of M.P., AIR (1952) SC 343
24. State of Karnatake v David Razario 7 SCC 728
25. Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484
26. Takhaji Hiraji vs Thakore Kubersing Chamansing & ... 2 May, 2001 2001(6) SCC 145
27. Kaushal Prasad v. State (1996), Cr. LJ, 2268
28. Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2012) 7 SCC 171]
29. Ganga Sing v State of Madhya Pradesh, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1118 of 2004, SC
30. Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan AIR (1977 SC 1063)
4

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
31. Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890)
32. Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350);
33. Bhagat Ram v. State of Punjab (AIR 1954 SC 621)
34. State of Karnataka v David Razario 7 SCC 728
35. Gujarat Travancore Agency, ... vs Commissioner 1989 AIR 1671, 1989 SCR (2)1000
36. Union Of India (Uoi) By The Dept. Of ... vs R.N. Rajam Iyer And Anr , AIR 1964
Mad 398
37. re Kingston Cotton Mill Co., 1896-2 Ch 279 at p. 284

BOOKS
1. A Textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology- R.P. Modi
2. The Indian Penal Code- Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, 34th Edition
3. The Code of Criminal Procedure- Ratanlal & Dhirajlal 17th Edition
4. The Law of Evidence- Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, 21st Edition
5. Income Tax Act, Taxmann, 51st Edition

STATUTES / STANDANRDS OF AUDIT

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Indian Evidence Act,
Code of Criminal Procedure
Constitution of India, 1950
Income Tax Act, 1961
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

7. Standards on Auditing (SA) 580 (Revised) Written Representation

8. ORMSBY & MACKAN Chartered Accountants Current Topics of Interest
9. SA 240 - Auditors responsibility to consider fraud and misstatement.
10. Audit Procedures - Guidance Note on Tax Audit under section 44AB of the Income
Tax 1961
11. SA 600 Using the Work of Another Auditor

DYNAMIC LINKS
1. [Link]
5

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
2. [Link]
3. [Link]/[Link]

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
APPEAL PEFERED BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA UNDER
ART. 134 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND SECTION 382 OF Cr.P.C.

SYNOPSIS OF FACTS
7

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

1. [Link],[Link](Appellant1)and
[Link](Appellant2),[Link],belongtoa
multimillionaire industrial family with many industries all over the country. The
familylivesin'GuptaPalace'[Link]
[Link],thereisadenseforestwherecitizensgofor
morningandeveningwalkwithdimlightingfacility.
2. [Link],beautiful,brilliant,cultured,attractive
and meritorious girl was aged about 24 years is daughter of Shri Brij Mohan
Sharma(Complainant),whoisamanofliterature,reformist,andsocialworkerand
[Link].
3. [Link]
[Link]
datinginthecollegecampusdecidedtobeweddedsubjecttotheconsentofparents
ofboth.
4. Oninsistenceofhisson,ShriVijayGuptavisitedhouseofShriBrijMohanSharma
[Link]
betweentheirthoughtsandlivingstyleShriBrijMohanclearlystatedthathewould
be performing marriage in an ordinary manner with normal clothes, old wearing
[Link],andperformedweddingon
11.06.2012,inanordinarymanner,withlittledowry.
5. On12.06.2012WeddingreceptionwasarrangedbyShriVijayGuptaonagrandand
lavish scale with the presence of more than 5000 persons including persons of
eminenceatRambaghPalacefrontlawnwhichisnormallynotgivenformarriage.
6. Afterthemarriage,[Link]
motherinlaw,[Link],hermother
inlaw was continuously making dowry demands for costly articles, household
goods,airconditioners,[Link]
tobeingareformistandweakeconomicposition,ShriBrijMohanSharmacouldnot

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
[Link],for
thehappinessofhislovingdaughterhegaveafixeddepositreceiptofRs.10lacsin
thenameofhisdaughterandassuredtomeettherestofthedemandsinaboutthree
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
torturedGracyGupta,burntherhandandputbruisesonsomepartsofherbody.
Understanding the situation, Mrs. Gracy Gupta did not convey anything to her
parentsbutmaintainedadiarywhereinsherecordeddifferentincidents,threatsand
misbehavior,[Link].
7. [Link]
Taxconductedasurveyu/s1333(5).Onthebasisrecordsofphotographs,videoof
the wedding ceremony and statements of event manager, decorator, electrician,
caterer, taxi supplier etc. investigation cell estimated total expenditure of above
[Link]/[Link]
[Link]
[Link].1lacoutof
pastsavingsandallotherexpenditurewasincurredbyGuptaPowerLimited,a
PublicLimitedCompany,[Link]
washusheduponinterventionofhigherauthorities.
8. [Link] Gupta, Vikram Gupta and Company filled return on31 March,2013.
StatutaryauditofcompanyasperformedbyoneofthefivetopauditfirmsofIndiain
whichtheyfoundsubstantialunexplainedexpenditure,questionedbutcleanreport
was provided as the company was accredited client. It was approved in Annual
generalmeetingwithvoteofdissentby5shareholders,[Link]
auditu/s44B,wasalsoconductedbyaSeniorCharteredaccountantbutdisallowable
expenditure including expenditure of Rs.20 lacs paid to Mr. Vijay Pal
Singh(Appellant3)werenothighlightedanddisallowedinthereturn.
9. ShriVijayGuptahadaboxer,VijayPalSingh,[Link]
[Link]

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
giventheamountinadvancebyaccountpayeecheque,forwhichreceiptwasissued
[Link]
[Link]
[Link]
GuptaonwalkingroadinataxicabdrivenbydriverMohanSinghaccompaniedby
Bahadur(Appellant4),adomesticservant,[Link]
onthelonelyroad,stoppedthecab,forciblydraggedherinthecab,kidnapped,put
[Link]
instigation of Bahadur, by the boxer Vijay Pal Singh also. After rape she was
strangled,[Link]
inforestarea,[Link]
10. [Link]
didnotreturnhometill4:00pm,ShriVijayGuptainformedShriBriMohanSharma,
[Link],[Link]
complaintatthepolicestation,Jagatpura,butthepolicecouldnotfindoutanything.
HeengagedaGalxoDetectives,adetectiveagencytotraceoutthebodyandthe
[Link]
Gracyintheforestarea,[Link]
[Link]/[Link]
was entrusted with the investigation, the usual formalities on inquest etc. were
undertakenandthebodywassentforthepostmortemon16.12.2014at4:40pm.
11. [Link]
[Link]
reportedthattherewereburnsonthehandandcertainbruisesondifferentpartsof
[Link]
[Link],VijayPal
Singh was detected and arrested on 17.12.2014. His statements were recorded
whereinheadmittedthatasumofRs.20Lacswasreceivedbyaccountpayeecheque
formGuptaPowerLimited,forwhichreceiptwasissuedandamountwascollected
through his bank. He disclosed name of driver, Mohan Singh and the servant,

10

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
[Link],whorapedfirst.
He confessedthat hemurdered under the directions of Mr. Vijay Gupta and for
consideration of Rs. 20 Lacs. The accused Vijay Pal Singh and Bahadur were
requiredtoundergo'spermdetectiontest'andthereportcorroboratedthestatements.
StatementsofBahadurwererecordedandheconfessedforrapetoenjoysexwiththe
beautifullady.

12. That,ShriBrijMohanSharma,fatherofthedeceasedon17.12.2014lodgedanother
complaintatPoliceStation,Jagatpura,claimingthathisdaughterGracyGuptahad
gotmarriedon11.06.2012andbeforeandafterthemarriage,herfatherinlawand
motherinlawcontinuouslymadedowrydemandsforover50Lacs,butduetohis
weakeconomicpositionhecouldnotfulfillthedemand,butgaveafixeddepositof
[Link],hisdaughterwas
notpermittedtovisitherparents'houseforthereasonthatdowrydemandwasnot
[Link],fatherinlawofhisdaughterandMrs.
LaxmiGupta,motherinlawofhisdaughterhadcommittedmurderofhisdaughter
GracythroughVijayPalSinghandhasalsoburntherhandandsomeotherpartsof
[Link],but
[Link],
anotherFIRwasregisteredatPoliceStation,Jagatpuraandthecasewasinvestigated
wherein,[Link]
offences,punishableu/s.304B,498Aand201ofIPCandsection3(4)ofDowry
ProhibitionAct,1961.
13.

Afterthemurder,[Link]

[Link]/s143(3)were
[Link]
madethesettlementapplicationu/s245(C)(1)oftheIncomeTaxAct,Offering
[Link]
IncometaxSettlementCommissionacceptedthedeclaredincomeu/s245(D)(4),
levied minimum penalty, but being sensitive case did not grant immunity from
prosecution.

11

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

Summary of Arguments
1) Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta & Laxmi Gupta should be convicted under 498A and
304B r/w 34 of IPC
There is absolutely no evidence that would implicate Mr. Vijay and Laxmi Gupta.
There is no witness as to cruelty and the facts alleged in the diary are inadmissible due
to being hearsay evidence. There are strong doubts casted over the medical report and
also over the investigation of the prosecution.
2) Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta should be charged under section 302 IPC
Vijay Gupta has not by any action caused death of the victim. Neither does he have
any motive or intention as to causing death of the victim. The alleged fact of
consideration being passed on for murder is without any corroboration and is thus
deemed to be baseless.
3) Whether Vijay Pal Sing has committed rape and murder
There is no evidence on record, which could implicate Vijay Pal Sing. There is no
corroboration available and also he lack of eyewitness makes the case against him
weak. There is doubt as a material witness has not been referred to and has not been
examined.
4) Whether Bahadur Sing should be convicted under section 376
There is no evidence on record to prove that Bahadur Sing has committed the offense.
Further he being a juvenile, should be dealt by the Juvenile Justice Board and not
sentenced to imprisonment as normal convicts.

12

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
5) Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Statutory Auditor?
There was no negligence as to statutory auditor as he was dependent upon the
representations, vouchers and details that were provided to him by the company. He
should not be held liable to check the credibility in detail of each entry
.
6) Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Tax Auditor?
The tax auditor was bonafide in making the report. The concept of materiality played
an important role with respect to the entry of Rs. 20 lakhs which was not highlighted.
Due to voluminous and complex transactions the accounting was done on test check.
7) Why has the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur not filed a
writ before High Court for levying maximum penalty and why has he not
sanctioned prosecution?
In order for the offence to be made out, it has to be taken into account that mens rea
plays a major role with regard to willful tax evasion. Furthermore it is also submitted
that the Principal Chief Commissioner would only sanction prosecution if he feels it is
reasonable to do so.

13

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

Arguments Advanced
1) Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta & Laxmi Gupta should be convicted under 498A
and 304B r/w 34 of IPC
The Appellants humbly submit that the impugned judgment of the Honble High
Court- convicting Appellants number 1 and 2 under S498A and 304B of IPC was
perverse and it has erred in reversing the judgment of the Learned Trial Court Judge
as evidence on record failed to establish ingredients of the crime alleged.

It is humbly submitted that there was no demand made in relation to dowry from the
Complainant. The facts that are alleged in the prosecutions case have no
corroborative evidence, and the evidence on record is vague and cannot be relied
upon. It should also be taken into account that the alleged amount of dowry demanded
is highly meager in comparison to the economic position of Appellant 1. The Court
should also take into account the lifestyle of Appellant 1, because it would be highly
paradoxical for a man of his stature to be alleged to have planned the murder of his
own daughter-in-law for such a meager amount. It is these points that the trial court
has appreciated while acquitting Appellant 1 and Appellant 2.

The prosecutions report states that when Appellant 1 met the Complainant, there
were talks over dowry, and the Complainant agreed to give little by way of dowry.
This is totally denied by Appellant 1. Appellant 1 prays that this is fabrication of a
story in order to implicate him because the Complainant has wrongly held him
responsible for his daughters death. It is prayed that the presumption that dowry was
14

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
given by the Complainant would go against S114 of Evidence Act as it is against
normal human nature.
It was also held that a presumption of facts in an assumption resulting from ones
experience of the course of natural events of human conduct and human character.
Such experience can be made use of in the ordinary course of life as well as in the
business of courts.1
It should also be taken into account that the Economic Condition of the Appellant 1
also gives rise to a presumption that it would be unreasonable to assume that he would
resort to cruelty to gain such a meager amount.

The Court should appreciate the fact the Complainant was an anti-dowry activist,
reformist and a social worker which makes it highly unreasonable for him to give
dowry. Furthermore he would also be an apt person to understand the effects that
follow when such dowry-demands are fulfilled, and therefore these alleged facts are
highly suspicious. It is prayed by the Appellant 1 that the Complainant has used his
position as an anti-dowry activist and implicated him in this case. The Complainant is
surely in a position and has the skill to do so. There is also a strong motive, which can
be attributed to the Complainant, which is to take revenge of his daughters death,
which he believes to be the responsibility of Appellant 1.
The Court should take account of the fact that Gracy Gupta (the Victim) was a
highly educated and clever lady and therefore expecting her to quietly withstand
suffering is highly doubtful. The fact that there is no FIR with regard to dowrydemand and harassment was filled before the murder casts a shadow as to whether the
facts alleged are genuine or not.
The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the police in respect of
commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances
in which the offence was committed, the names of the actual culprits and the part
played by them as well as the names of eye -witnesses present at the scene of
occurrence. (ii) Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in
embellishment which is a creature of afterthought. On account of delay, the report not
1 State of Karnataka v David Rozario, 2002 Cri LJ 4127 (SC)
15

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity, danger creeps in the introduction of
coloured version, exaggerated account or concocted story as a result of deliberation
and consultation. (iii) It is, therefore, essential that the delay in lodging the first
information report should be satisfactorily explained.2
Looking at the background of the Complainant and his daughter, their educational
qualifications, intellect and position, this delay cannot be explained and thus this leads
to a great doubt deing further cast on the theory in the prosecution report.
In the prosecution report it is further stated that due to dowry demands, the
Complainant transferred a fixed deposit of Rs.10 lakhs. But it has to be duly noted
that no threats have been made to the daughter at this point and the Complainant
being a dowry activist is certainly in a position to retaliate. The Appellant 1 further
prays that money was transferred in the sole name of the Complainants daughter and
there is nothing in the prosecutions report to claim that the Appellants used this sum.
The diary that alleged dowry demand and various other events is a highly subjective
representation and would not be held as strong evidence. It is the representation of the
mindset of the Complainants daughter and it should not be taken word to word but
should be contextually understood. The diary forms a part of hearsay evidence. The
word hearsay is used in various senses. Sometimes it means whatever a person is
heard to say; sometimes it means whatever a person declares on information given by
someone else; sometimes it is treated as nearly synonymous to irrelevant. Secondhand evidence whether oral or written which is not connected by responsible
testimony with the party against whom it is offered, is to be rejected. 3 Thus there is a
requisite of corroboration, which is absent in the present case.
In a case where a woman wrote letter with regard to cruelty faced by her, it was held
relevant only when it was corroborated by testimony of witnesses.4 But where there is
no corroboration for hearsay evidence, it proves fatal for the side that wants the
hearsay evidence admitted.5 Thus it is submitted that in the present scenario, evidence

2 Rajeevan v. State of Kerala (2003) SC 1813

3 Sharad Bircichand Sarda v State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622
4 State of Maharashtra v Vasant Shankar Mhasane, 1993 Cr LJ 1134 (Bom)
5 Mukul Rani Varshnei v DDA (1995) 6 SCC 120: 1995 SCC(Cri) 1049
16

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
in personal diary will not be admissible due to lack of any other evidence or witness
for corroboration.
The neighbor PW 4 Shri Sohan Lal, who has heard the demand of dowry, was not on
the spot of the event. This fact has been appreciated by the Learned Trial Court Judge
and thus his testimony has been considered in due proportion.
If the court before whom the witness gives evidence has the opportunity to form the
opinion about the general tenor of evidence given by the witness, the Appellate Court
which had not this benefit will have to attach due weight to the appreciation of
evidence by the trial court.6
The fact that Gupta Place was huge and he being not at spot during the event raises
serious doubt over what he has heard and furthermore of his interpretation of the
things that he had heard. Though the Appellant 1 and 2 totally deny all allegations
regarding dowry demand, it should be appreciated that demand/asking for money
from a daughter-in-law for personal purpose is not an offence and it does not relate to
dowry.
A demand for money on account of some financial stringency or for meeting some
urgent domestic expenses of for purchasing manure cannot be termed as a demand for
dowry as the said word is normally understood.7
It is further submitted that the Learned High Court has erred while making the
observation that the bruises and burns that were observed during post mortem
corroborate with the diary. It should be noted that this evidence cannot be taken into
consideration as the postmortem report does not state whether these wounds predate
the rape and murder of the victim.
The Supreme Court has observed- "Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only
corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner alleged
and nothing more. The use which the defence can make of the medical evidence is to
prove that the injuries could not possibly have been caused in the manner alleged and
thereby discredit the eye-witnesses.8

6 M.K. Antony v. State of U.P. (1985) SC 48

7 Appasaheb And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 January, 2007, Appeal (crl.) 1613 of
2005
8 Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484
17

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
Thus coroboration is required for which to take place with the diary, the cause of
wounds and burns should have been identified. It is also stated in the prosecutions
report that she was draged on the road and her body was mutilated. There is a strong
posibility that the brusies occurred during the same time.
The Supreme court has held that the charges made against an accused under Section
498A, IPC, must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt and that the requirement of
proof is not satisfied by surmises and conjectures.9
It was also held that for holding an accused guilty under Section 498A, IPC, it has to
be established that the woman has been subjected to cruelty continuously/persistently
or at least in close proximity of time to the lodging of the complaint and petty quarrels
cannot be termed as "cruelty" to attract the provisions of Section 498A, IPC, though
mental torture to the extent that it becomes unbearable may be termed as cruelty.10
Thus we see that the charges as to cruelty were not proved against the Appellants.
There is no evidence on record that could implicate the Appellants and therefore it is
submitted that the Learned High Court Judge erred with regard to the same.
It is further submitted that the S304B cannot be proved, as the ingredients that are
required for fulfilling the section are not met
S304B. Dowry death. Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or
bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years
of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty
or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection
with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called dowry death, and such
husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
As in the present case there was no demand for dowry, further, the victim was not
subjected to any cruelty from husband or any of his relative and there is no evidence
on record that proves contrary, we humbly submit that the Complainant fails to make
out the S304B against the appellants.11 The death has been caused due to the murder
and is not covered under the said section.
As per the observations made by the Supreme Court -The Appellate Court has also to
keep in view the fact that the trial judge has the advantage of looking at the
9 State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal & Anr. [(1994) 1 SCC 73]
10 Manju Ram Kalita v. State of Assam [(2009) 13 SCC 330]
11 Ramaswamy v Dasari Mohan, AIR 1998 SC 774
18

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
demeanour of witnesses and that the accused is still entitled to the benefit of doubt.
The doubt should be such as a rational thinking person will reasonably, honestly and
conscientiously entertain and not the doubt of an irrational mind.12
It is also held that the High Court should not have interferred with the judgment
passed by the trial Court unless it was of the positive opinion that the judgment was
perverse and that it had to be reversed for "substantial and compelling reasons" 13. It is
contended that since substantive and compelling reason have not been indicated, the
judgment of the High Court is liable to be set aside and that of the trial court is to be
restored. It is also contended that even if all circumstance appearing against the
appellant are taken into consideration, the cumulative effect of those circumstance
does not lead to the irresistible conclusion that the appellant was guilty.14
Further it has to be noted that as there is no evidence of cruelty or dowry demand,
even the possibility of formation of a chain of circumstances can be ruled out.
For proving guilt based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution will have to
satisfy the following tests:
(1) The circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be
cogently and firmly established;
(2) Those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards
guilt of the accused;
(3) The circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there
is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was
committed by the accused and none else; and
(4) The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and
incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and
such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilty of the accused but should
be inconsistent with his innocence.15
As discussed above, there certainly are alternate explanations to the allegations made
by the complainant, and also there is no evidence that proves guilt of the appellants
beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the charges are not proved against the Appellant.
12 State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Samman Das, AIR 1972 SC 677 - (1972) 3 SCR 58
13 Sanwat Singh vs. State of Rajasthan, (1961) 3 SCR 120
14 Ajit Savant Majagavi vs State Of Karnataka, AIR 1997, SC 3255
15 Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P., AIR (1990) SC 79
19

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

2) Whether Mr. Vijay Gupta should be charged under section 302 IPC

In order to charge an individual with the offence of murder, one has to prove that the
act was done with the intention to cause death or grave bodily injury thus leading to
death16. Death of the victim must be the consequence of the act and intention must be
proved accordingly.

[Link] in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if

the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or

16 State of UP v Virendra Prasad, AIR 2004, SC 1517

20

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
SecondlyIf it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the
offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is
caused, or
ThirdlyIf it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the
bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to
cause death, or
FourthlyIf the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous
that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause
death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing
death or such injury as aforesaid.

It is humbly submitted that Appellant 1 had no motive with regard to causing death of
the victim i.e. his daughter-in-law. As stated in the first Issue, he had never demanded
dowry and had co-ordeal relation with her. Though the diary mentions a few instances
of unrest, as it is hearsay, therefore it will not be relevant due to lack of corroboration.

Motive is that which moves a man to do a particular act. There can be no action
without motive, which must exist for every voluntary act. Generally speaking the
voluntary acts of sane persons have an impelling emotion or motive. 17 Motive could
itself be considered as a circumstance when the case is based on circumstantial
evidence.18 There is no motive present in this case, as the murder of the victim would
lead to no personal gain or satisfaction of Appellant 1. It is further held that motive in
itself cannot take place of proof19 and previous threats, altercations and events will
help to form motive.20

The most important element of the crime is the mens rea that is the intention. In order
to prove murder, it has to be proven that it was the intention of the Appellant 1 to
17 Justice Chandrachud and Manohar, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal- the law of Evidence 75 (Wadhwa & Company)
2007
18 State v Dinkar Bandu (1969) 72 Bom LR 405
19 State of Punjab v Sucha Sing AIR 2003 SC 1471
20 Chhotka v State of WB, AIR 1958 Cal 482

21

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
cause death or grave harm to the Victim. Further it has to be shown that the act of the
Appellant 1 caused death of the victim. In this scenario, there is no act of the
Appellant 1that directly causes the death of the victim. Appellant 3 does the act that
has caused the death of the victim. Thus it is he that might be convicted for the
murder and not Appellant 1.

It is further alleged that there was common intention between Appellant 1 and 3, and
Appellant 1 had given money to Appellant 3 by way of an Account Payee check of
Gupta Power Ltd. This check of value 20 lakhs is alleged to be the consideration of
the murder of the victim. Appellant 1 has totally denied this. There is no evidence to
prove that the 20 lakhs that were transferred were consideration as to murder. It is
submitted by the Appellant 1 that 20 lakhs that were transferred to Appellant 3 was for
his personal use. As there was an employer-employee relationship between the two,
which predated the murder, allegations that pointed at Rs.20 lakhs as consideration
were baseless.

It is also submitted that the fact that consideration of murder is given by an account
payee check and that too of a public limited company in itself sounds untrue.

Further it is upon the prosecution to prove as to whether the money was transferred as
a consideration for murder21. Though the prosecution might show the check entry as a
proof of transfer of money, it has to be taken into account that the reason given by the
Appellant 1 will have to be accepted, as when the prosecution adduces evidence, the
Appellant has to only raise doubt as to guilt 22. As there is no direct evidence as to
reason behind transfer of money and the murder, circumstantial evidence might be
used to implicate Appellant 1.

It was pointed out that great care must be taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence
and if the evidence relied on is reasonably capable of two inferences, the one in
21 Jarnail Sing v State of Punjab AIR 1996, SC 755
22 State of Rajasthan v Madho, AIR 1991 SC 1065
22

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
favour of the accused must be accepted.23 It was also pointed out that the
circumstances relied upon must be found to have been fully established and the
cumulative effect of all the facts so established must be consistent only with the
hypothesis of guilt.

"It is well to remember that in case where the evidence is of a circumstantial nautre,
the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be in the
first instance be fully established, and all the facts so established should be consistent
only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstances should
be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be such as to exclude every
hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain
of evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion
consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that
within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused."24
Thus when in this case an inference as to money given for personal use can be drawn,
and adverse inference should not be drawn.

It was further stated that Appellant 3 confessed in front of the police with regard to
murder of the victim for the consideration given by Appellant 1. As under S25 of
evidence act, these statements cannot be proved against the person making it. If this
evidence leads to further discovery of admissible fact then it may be proved. 25 This
was totally denied when his statement was taken under section 313 of CRPC. As the
statement has led to no new discovery of facts, it will not be admissible and it cannot
be taken into consideration.
Appellant 3 has changed his statement as under Section 313 of CRPC in which he
denies all allegations and charges that are framed against him.

23 State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, (1992) Crl LJ 1104

24 Hanumant Govind Nargundkar v. State of M.P., AIR (1952) SC 343
25 State of Karnatake v David Razario 7 SCC 728
23

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
Thus we see that there is no link between the cause of death, that is the act that lead to
death and the actions and intention of Appellant 1. It can in no way be established that
the Appellant 1 has anything to do with the murder.

On the basis of circumstantial evidence, which in absence of direct implication is an

important way to prove guilt, it is not possible as there are many inferences that can
be given which can be alternate options to the prosecutions theory.

Thus it is submitted that in absence of any evidence direct or circumstantial, the

section 302 is not made out against Appellant 1.

3) Whether Vijay Pal Sing has committed rape and murder

It is humbly submitted that Appellant 3 has not committed the offence of rape and
murder. It is further prayed that there is no evidence on record to implicate him for the
above offences. The Learned Judge of the Trial Court and The Honble High Court
has erred in properly appreciating the evidence in this case.

The Appellant 3 submits that there is no evidence, which shows that he has committed
rape on the victim. It has to be noted that there was no eyewitness though the place
from which the victim was allegedly abducted was a place where people went for
morning walks. There were no bruises on the body of the victim, which should have

24

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
developed with regard to the struggle, and the victim being dragged on the road. 26 It
should be further noted that all the bruises and burns on the victims body was held to
be corroborating with the diary and the Honble High Court observed the same. Thus
it can be said that no new bruises were seen on her body. The medical evidence also
observes no struggle marks on the body of the accused. The tears in the vagina and
blood are highly probable aftereffects of sex and not of forced sex. In a married
woman, the hymen is totally destroyed so the aftereffects of rape are observed outside
the private areas and not internally27. In the present postmortem report, no such
observation has been made with regard to the victim. This further casts doubt on the
allegations made by the prosecution.

Medical Evidence is generally in need to corroboration to prove a certain fact. The

Supreme Court has observed- "Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only
corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner alleged
and nothing more. The use which the defence can make of the medical evidence is to
prove that the injuries could not possibly have been caused in the manner alleged and
thereby discredit the eye-witnesses.28

In the present scenario, the findings of the postmortem report are disputed and there is
further no corroboration available on account of no eyewitness. Circumstantial
evidence also seems bleak due to the fact that there were only four people on the spot
when the incident took place. They were- Appellant 3 and 4, the victim and the driver.
Out of which the victim is the deceased, the driver has not been traced and it is the
submission of the Appellant 3 that when he had left after having sex, the victim was
alive and it is the driver or the juvenile who might have strangulated her. The
investigation and medical officers has failed to investigate with regard to the
26 Moot Proposition
27 R. P. Modi, A textbook of Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology, Page 337-338 ,
[Link]
id=8wslBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA337&lpg=PA337&dq=hymen+of+a+female+accustomed+to+sex&source=bl&ot
s=7YDDlrT3iq&sig=mlxHF6CgrAS3Bbr2H0Cqfd5VlDg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBmoVChMI9prBx
8L0xwIVSZGOCh3klAFE#v=onepage&q=hymen%20of%20a%20female%20accustomed%20to
%20sex&f=false
28 Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484

25

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
fingerprints and also there is no conclusive proof that would tell us about the person
who killed the victim.

Honble Supreme Court held it to be true that if a material witness, who would unfold
the genesis of the incident or an essential part of the prosecution case, not
convincingly brought to fore otherwise, or where there is a gap or infirmity in the
prosecution case which could have been supplied or made good by examining a
witness who though available is not examined, the prosecution case can be termed as
suffering from a deficiency and withholding of such a material witness would oblige
the court to draw an adverse inference against the prosecution by holding that if the
witness would have been examined it would not have supported the prosecution case.
On the other hand if already overwhelming evidence is available and examination of
other witnesses would only be a repetition or duplication of the evidence already
adduced, non-examination of such other witnesses may not be material. In such a case
the court ought to scrutinise the worth of the evidence adduced. The court of facts
must ask itselfwhether in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was necessary
to examine such other witness, and if so, whether such witness was available to be
examined and yet was being withheld from the court? If the answer be positive then
only a question of drawing an adverse inference may arise. If the witnesses already
examined are reliable and the testimony coming from their mouth is unimpeachable
the court can safely act upon it, uninfluenced by the factum of non-examination of
other witnesses.29

In case of Kaushal Prasad v. State 30, it was held that where the alleged ill treatment
and demand of dowry could not be established and the mother of the deceased, who
could have been an important witness was not examined, the conviction of the
accused was not proper.

29 Takhaji Hiraji vs Thakore Kubersing Chamansing & ... 2 May, 2001 2001(6) SCC 145
30Kaushal Prasad v. State (1996), Cr. LJ, 2268
26

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
Thus we see that non-examination of material witness that is the Driver, who would
have been the eyewitness, would surely prove fatal, as it is the only evidence that was
available for corroboration with the medical report.

The Honble Supreme Court has held that the prosecution has to prove its own case
beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from the weakness of the case of
defence and hence there must be proper legal evidence to record the conviction of the
accused.31

It is further stated that the settled position of law is that the prosecution is required to
establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt by adducing evidence.
Hence, if the prosecution in a given case adduces evidence to establish the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt, the court cannot acquit the accused on the ground
that there are some defects in the investigation, but if the defects in the investigation
are such as to cast a reasonable doubt in the prosecution case, then of course the
accused is entitled to acquittal because of such doubt.32

It has been consistently laid down by the Supreme Court that where a case rests
squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when
all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the
innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person.33. The circumstances from
which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond
reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact
sought to be inferred from those circumstances 3435. , It was further laid down that
where the case depends upon the conclusion drawn from circumstances the
cumulative effect of the circumstances must be such as to negative the innocence of
the accused and bring the offences home beyond any reasonable doubt.36
31 Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi) [(2012) 7 SCC 171]
32 Ganga Sing v State of Madhya Pradesh, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1118 of 2004, SC
33 Hukam Singh v. State of Rajasthan AIR (1977 SC 1063)
34 Ashok Kumar Chatterjee v. State of M.P. (AIR 1989 SC 1890)
35 Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1987 SC 350);
36 Bhagat Ram v. State of Punjab (AIR 1954 SC 621)
27

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

We can see that the chain of circumstances is not coomplete while proving the guilt of
the accused that is Appellant 3. In the present scenario, defects in investigation has led
to the faliur of corroboration of evidence and thus this benefit of doubt would
certainly be conferred upon on the Appellant 3.

Thus as there is an alternate theory that can be used to explain his role in the incident,
it is humbly submitted that he should be acquitted as the charges are not met as the
prosecution fails to discharge the burden of proof.
It was further stated that Appellant 3 confessed in front of the police with regard to
murder of the victim for the consideration given by Appellant 1. As under S25 of
evidence act, these statements cannot be proved against the person making it. If this
evidence leads to further discovery of admissible fact then it may be proved. 37 This
was totally denied when his statement was taken under section 313 of CRPC. As the
statement has led to no new discovery of facts, it will not be admissible and it cannot
be taken into consideration.

4) Whether Bahadur Sing should be convicted under section 376

It is humbly submitted by Appellant 4 that the Honble High Court has erred in
properly appreciating the evidence on record. It is prayed that Appellant 4 is innocent
and has not committed rape as alleged by the prosecution. There is no evidence on
record that would implicate him in this case. Appellant 4 has not forced the victim
into sexual intercourse. The medical report shows no bruises or injuries with relation
to the incident. When the Appellant 4 left the scene, the victim was still alive. There is
a possibility that she might have been forced to submit into sexual intercourse by
Appellant 3 or the driver. It is also prayed that there is lacuna in the investigation done
by the prosecution and the non-availability of the material witness that is the driver
37 State of Karnataka v David Razario 7 SCC 728
28

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
and that of the alleged crime scene that is the car will certainly raise a benefit of doubt
in favor of the Appellant 4.
Furthermore though there is no direct evidence as to the crime, the guilt can certainly
not be established with support of circumstantial evidence, as there are no evidence or
witnesses to prove the facts that make the chain of circumstance. And also there can
be alternate theories that tell us about the different possibilities of events that might
have taken place at the crime scene. As the rule governing circumstantial evidence is
that the chain of events must be the only possible explanation and such chain cannot
be rejected by the accused. As this is not the case, it is humbly submitted that guilt
cannot be established beyond reasonable doubt.
Confession given to the police is not admissible, as it does not give rise to any finding
of facts. There is no explanation with regard to why the juvenile would be taken along
with Appellant 3 in order to commit murder especially when there has been no
consideration being transferred to him.
It has to be also taken into account that the Honble High Court in its sentence of
imprisonment to the Juvenile has erred as it has gone against the Juvenile Justice Act.
The Appellant 4 comes under the purview of the Juvenile Justice Act as he fits in the
definition of juvenile under the said act, and therefore on a purely argumentative
ground, if guilt was to be found, he has to be dealt with by the Juvenile Justice Board
and to be processed accordingly. Therefore, the Judgment of the Learned Trial Court
judge would be apt in a scenario where guilt is established.
5) Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Statutory Auditor?
It is humbly submitted that there was no negligence and misconduct on the part of the
Statutory Auditor, though a clean report was given. Taking into account the
information provided to him by the Company, he has duly and responsibly discharged
the duties that have been allocated to him.
Statutory auditor means and includes a chartered accountant appointed as an auditor
under a Central/State or Provincial Act as well as an auditor appointed under any

29

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
agreement. His responsibility is to design and perform audit procedure to obtain
sufficient appropriate audit evidence to be able to draw reasonable conclusions.
A standard audit opinion i.e. clean report will be given by statutory auditor when after
accompanying a company's financial statements provides reasonable assurance that
the statements represent the company's financial position at the date of the statements
and the year's financial results in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles.
As per Standard on Auditing (SA) 580, the auditor shall request management to
provide a written representation that it has provided the auditor with all relevant
information agreed in the terms of the audit engagement, and that all transactions have
been recorded and are reflected in the financial statements.38
It is important to bear in mind that a 'clean opinion' is not synonymous with a clean
bill of financial health. Therefore, financial statements may indicate that the company
has losses, working capital deficiencies, or deteriorating financial ratios. As long as
this information is clearly reflected in the company's financial statements, which
include the notes, the audit opinion is unqualified.39
Thus the statements of accounts produced before him was bona fide. In addition
statutory auditor has mentioned a emphasis note in his clean report regarding
unexplained expenditure which has not taken into consideration by prosecution while
alleging the charges.
An auditor cannot obtain absolute assurance that material misstatements in the
financial statements will be detected. Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit,
there is an unavoidable risk that some material misstatements of the financial
statements will not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and
performed in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in India.40
38 Standards on Auditing (SA) 580 (Revised) Written Representation

39

ORMSBY & MACKAN

Chartered

Accountants

Current

Topics

of

Interest[Link]

40 SA 240 - Auditors responsibility to consider fraud and misstatement.

30

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
In a UK case referred to in an Indian Case 41 it was held that "The duty of an auditor
generally was very carefully considered by this Court in In re London and General
Bank and I cannot usefully add anything to what will be found there. It was there
pointed out that an auditor's duty is to examine the books..... But it was also pointed
out that an auditor is not an insurer, and that in the discharge of his duty he is only
bound to exercise a reasonable amount of care and skill, It was further pointed out that
what in any particular case is a reasonable amount of care and skill depends on the
circumstances of that case; that if there is nothing which ought to excite suspicion,
less care may properly be considered reasonable than could be so considered if
suspicion was or ought to have been aroused. These are the general principles which
have to be applied to cases of this description protest, however, against the notion that
an auditor is bound to be suspicious as distinguished from reasonably careful. To
substitute the one expression for the other may easily lead to serious error."
It was further held that
"It is the duty of an auditor to bring to bear on the work he has to perform that skill,
care and caution which a reasonably competent, careful, and cautious auditor would
use. What is reasonable skill, care and caution must depend on the particular
circumstances of each case. An auditor is not bound to be a detective, or as was said,
to approach his work with suspicion or with a foregone conclusion that there is
something wrong. He is a watch-dog, but not a blood-hound. He is justified in
believing tried servants of the company in whom confidence is placed by the
company. He is entitled to assume that they are honest, and to rely upon their
representations, provided he takes reasonable care. IE there is anything calculated to
excite suspicion he should probe it to the bottom; but in the absence of that kind he is
only bound to be reasonably cautious and careful. The duties of auditors must not be
rendered too onerous. Their work is responsible and laborious and the remuneration
moderate."42
41 Union Of India (Uoi) By The Dept. Of ... vs R.N. Rajam Iyer And Anr , AIR 1964 Mad 398

42 re Kingston Cotton Mill Co., 1896-2 Ch 279 at p. 284

31

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

Thus it is humbly prayed that no action should be taken against the statutory auditor
as he has completed his duty in a bona fide manner.

6) Whether there was negligence and misconduct by Tax Auditor?

It is humbly submitted that the Tax Auditor has carried out his duties in an apt and
bona fide way. Due to voluminous and complex transactions the accounting was done
on test check.

32

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
The tax audit is to be carried out by an accountant. The term accountant includes
a chartered accountant within the meaning of Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (38 of
1949) and includes, in relation to any State, any person, who by virtue of the
provisions of sub-section (2) of section 141 of the Companies Act, 2013 (S226 of
Companies Act 1956), is entitled to be appointed to act as an auditor of companies
registered in that State."
Tax auditor has no powers to access the books of accounts as compare to statutory
auditor has under section 143 of the Companies Act 2013. He deals with the matters
related to the all the taxes.
If the accounts of the business or profession of a person have been audited under any
other law by the statutory auditor(s), it is not necessary for the tax auditor appointed
under section 44AB to conduct the audit once again in the matter of expression of
"true and fair view" of the state of affairs of the entity and of its profit/loss for the
period covered by the audit. However, the said section envisages the certification of
the particulars in the prescribed form on which the tax auditor has to express his
opinion as to whether these are `true and correct'. In other words, where an audit has
already been conducted and the opinion of the auditor has been expressed on the
accounts, it would not be necessary to repeat the entire exercise to express similar
opinion all over again. The tax auditor has only to annex a Guidance Note on Tax
Audit under Section 44AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 53 copy of the audited
accounts and the auditor's report and other documents forming part of these accounts
to his report and verify the particulars in the prescribed form for expressing his
opinion as to whether these are true and correct.43
When the auditor delegates the work to assistants or uses the work performed by
other auditors and experts, he will continue to be responsible for forming and
expressing his opinion on the financial information. He will be entitled to rely on
work performed by others, provided he exercises adequate skills and care and is not
aware of any reason to believe that he should not have so relied. In the case of any
independent statutory appointment to perform the work on which the auditor has to
rely in forming his opinion, such as in the case of the work of branch auditors
43 Audit Procedures - Guidance Note on Tax Audit under section 44AB of the Income Tax 1961
33

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
appointed under Companies Act, the auditors report should expressly state the fact of
such reliance44
As the statutory auditor has already performed the work by complying with all the
necessary professional ethics, tax auditor performed the audit on sampling basis. On
basis of bona fide clean report of the statutory auditor he has not found anything
suspicious and mala fide entries and thus not highlighted disallowed the expenditures
and disallowed the same in the return.
Another point is that tax auditor is a watchdog and not a bloodhound. Thus unless he
found anything suspicious in nature he will not go into deep investigation. The
statements of accounts produced before him by Gupta Power Limited related to
income tax was bona fide and satisfactory to his knowledge.
As per the concept of materiality, the amount of Rs.20 lakhs, which is not highlighted,
is a petty amount as compared to the total turnover of the company. Therefore not
highlighting the said transaction cannot amount to negligence and misconduct.
Thus negligence and misconduct of tax auditor was a mere allegation made by the
prosecutor.

7) Why has the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur not filed a
writ before High Court for levying maximum penalty and why has he not
sanctioned prosecution?

44 SA 600 Using the Work of Another Auditor

34

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
It is humbly submitted that the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur
has not erred in not filing a writ in High Court for maximum penalty and also for not
filing for prosecution.

It has to be taken into account that the offence as to evasion of taxes is an offence for
which intention of the parties have to be proved. The section deals with willful
evasion of taxes. In order to file a petition, one will have to prima face established that
there is mens rea involved. In order to be successful, one will have to prove beyond
reasonable doubt the guilt of the assesse.

There can be no dispute that having regard to the provisions of s. 276C, which
speaks of wilful failure on the part of defaulter and taking into consideration the
nature of the penalty, which is punitive, no sentence can be imposed under that
provision unless the element of mens rea is established.45
Therefore writ petition was not filed.

Sanction of prosecution by the Principal Commissioner, as under section 279 of the

Income tax act would only take place if the Principal Commissioner orders
prosecution or if any tax authority takes previous sanctions from commissioner. It is
prayed that sanctions would only be granted if the Commissioner finds it reasonable
to do so. In the current scenario, both the statutory and the tax auditor had made a
clean report. The Commissioner submits that he was satisfied with regard to the
settlement and also with regard to the explanation given for the same. There was no
evidence on record or otherwise that would lead to any kind of suspicion as to the
entries and transactions of the company. Therefore, no prosecution was launched.

45 Gujarat Travancore Agency, ... vs Commissioner 1989 AIR 1671, 1989 SCR (2)1000

35

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015

PRAYER

36

5TH FYLC RANKA NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION 2015
In the light of issues raised arguments advanced and authorities cited, the appellants humbly
pray that, may this Honble Court be pleased to1. Acquit the appellants
2. Reduce punishment to term undergone
3. Transfer the case of Appellant 4 to Juvenile Justice Board
And pass any other order as the Honble Court deems fit in the interest of equity, justice
and good conscience.
For this act of Kindness the appellants shall humbly every pray.

Sd/(Counsel for Appellants)

37