DES Shri Navalmal Firodiya Law College

DES Shri Navalmal Firodiya Law College

Moot Submission

Moot Submission
BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSION
AT PUNE, MAHARASHTRA
BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSION
AT PUNE, MAHARASHTRA
IN THE MATTER OF

IN THE MATTER OF
State of Maharashtra ……..Prosecution

State of Maharashtra VERSUS ……..Prosecution

Rajesh Sahoo VERSUS ……Respondent

Rajesh Sahoo ……Respondent

WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE
PROSECUTION
WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE
PROSECUTION
NAME: Samruddhi Suhas Dharasurkar
CLASS: Vth BBA LL. B
NAME: Samruddhi Suhas Dharasurkar
DIVISION: A
CLASS: Vth BBA LL. B
ROLL NO. 11
DIVISION: A
ROLL NO. 11

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………. 2
LIST OF ABRRIVATIONS…………………………………..3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES…………………………………4
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………….6
STATEMENT OF FACTS …………………………………...7
ISSUE RAISED……………………………………………... 8
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED………………………………..9
PRAYER CLAUSE………………………………………….11

2
 LIST OF ABRRIVATIONS

IEA Indian Evidence Act

IPC Indian Penal Code

CrPC Code of Criminal Procedure

Hon’ble Honourable

AIR All India Reporter

SC Supreme Court

3
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Statutes

• Indian Penal Code, 1860

• Indian Evidence Act, 1872
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Case Laws

• Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47

• Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1952 SC 354
• Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984
SC 1622
• State of UP v. M.K. Anthony, AIR 1985 SC 48

Books

• Ratanlal & Dhirajlal’s The Indian Penal Code

• Batuk Lal’s Law of Evidence
• K.D. Gaur’s Textbook on Indian Penal Code

4
 Webliography

• www.indiankanoon.org
• www.scconline.com
• www.lawtimesjournal.in

5
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to try the instant matter under
Section 177 read with Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973.

Section 177 :
Ordinary place of inquiry and trial -
Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court
within whose local jurisdiction it was committed.

Read with Section 209:

Commitment of case to Court of Session when offence is triable
exclusively by it-
When in a case instituted on a police report or otherwise, the accused
appears or is brought before the Magistrate and it appears to the
Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of
Session, he shall-

(a) commit the case to the Court of Session;

(b) subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the
accused to custody during, and until the conclusion of, the trial;
(c) send to that Court the record of the case and the documents and
articles, if any, which are to be produced in evidence;
(d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the commitment of the case to the
Court of Session.

6
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The Respondent, Rajesh Sahoo, is accused of murdering his

wife, Meera Sahoo, on 15th June 2009 in their residence at
Shivaji Nagar, Pune, Maharashtra.

2. The couple had a history of frequent quarrels, with neighbour’s

testifying to their ongoing disputes over financial and personal
matters.

3. No direct eyewitnesses to the crime are available, and the case is

based on circumstantial evidence.

4. The prosecution relies upon an extra-judicial confession made

by the accused while walking on the streets, murmuring, "The
matter is finished once for all."

5. The confession, along with corroborative circumstantial

evidence, forms the foundation of the prosecution’s case.

6. The prosecution seeks to establish that the accused’s statement

constitutes a confession under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
and that the circumstantial evidence, when read in conjunction
with the confession, is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt.

7
 ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether the self-addressed statement or muttering by the

accused, which admitted guilt, constitutes a confession under the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872?

2. Whether the circumstantial evidence, coupled with the extra-

judicial confession, is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond a reasonable doubt?

8
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1.Whether the self-addressed statement or muttering by the

accused, which admitted guilt, constitutes a confession under the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872?

ARGUMENTS:
The Prosecution argues that,

1. As per Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a statement

suggesting an inference of guilt amounts to an admission, and
when it relates to a crime, it is a confession.

2. In Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor, the Privy Council held

that a confession need not be made directly to any authority; it
can be inferred from any statement made voluntarily.

3. In State of UP v. M.K. Anthony, the Supreme Court held that

extra-judicial confessions, even if made to oneself, are
admissible if they unequivocally admit guilt. The accused’s
statement, “The matter is finished once for all,” implies his
knowledge and participation in the crime.

4. Precedent from Palvinder Kaur v. State of Punjab: The

Supreme Court observed that a confession, to be admissible,
must be voluntary and conclusive. The accused’s statement,
when analysed in its full context, establishes direct guilt and is
not a mere casual remark.

9
 2.Whether the circumstantial evidence, coupled with the extra-
judicial confession, is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond a reasonable doubt?

ARGUMENTS:
The Prosecution argues that,
1. Circumstantial evidence can be the sole basis for conviction if it
meets the test laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State
of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 SC 1622. The chain of evidence
must be complete, leading to only one conclusion: guilt of the
accused.

2. Connecting Evidence:
o The accused had prior altercations with the deceased,
indicating motive.
o Neighbour’s testified about loud fights between the couple
days before the incident.
o The forensic report establishes that the murder weapon, a
kitchen knife, was found in the accused’s house with the
deceased’s blood.
o The accused was the last person seen with the deceased
before her death.
o The confession statement corroborates the evidence,
leaving no room for alternative explanations.

Thus, the prosecution establishes that the accused is guilty of the

offense under Section 302 of the IPC.

10
 PRAYER

Wherefore, in light of the above submissions, the Prosecution prays

that this Hon’ble Court:

1. Hold that the accused’s self-addressed statement amounts to a

confession under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

2. Convict the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.

3. Award appropriate punishment as per the provisions of the law.

AND/OR

pass any other order it may deem fit, in the interest of Justice,
Equity and Good Conscience.

S/d -
Prosecution

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted.

11