NLUO-INTRA UNIVERSITY MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2018

MOOT PROPOSITION1

1. On 12.01.2017 Chintu a boy aged 11 years, made an allegation of sexual abuse

against his tutor Mr. Rambo (India citizen) who used to take his private

classes for Mathematics.

2. On 12.01.2017, upon returning from his tuition, Chintu who was then crying

loudly alleged that between 6:00 – 7:00 pm Mr. Rambo had inserted a pencil

in his anus. The said allegation was narrated by Chintu to his parents. Upon

hearing of the said incident, Chintu’s parents rushed to Mr. Rambo’s house,

situated 300 mts from their residence. Upon arriving at Mr. Rambo’s house,

they discovered that he was putting away a blackboard containing some

Mathematics problems. Thereafter, Chintu’s parents started thrashing Mr.

Rambo. Upon hearing the commotion, police arrived at the scene of crime and

took away Mr. Rambo, Chintu’s parents and Chintu to the Police station.

3. Thereafter the Police recorded the statements of Chintu’s parents, Mr. Hari

and Mr. Raja (who had seen Chintu leave Mr. Rambo’s house crying) and

Chintu. Thereafter on the same day an FIR was registered against Mr. Rambo

under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012

(“POCSO, 2012”) and Section 377 r/w Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code,

1 The Moot Problem has been drafted by Mr. Akash Chandra Jauhari, Alumni of NLUO (Batch of
2016) and is currently an Associate at Wadhwa Chambers, Delhi. All participants are requested
not to contact Mr. Akash in regard to the Moot Problem till the time of the Moot. Any participant
found acting in contrary to this, shall be disqualified from the competition.
Disclaimer: The instant moot proposition is a work of fiction, artificial and created only for academic purposes. Names,
characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in
a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.
 1860 (“IPC, 1860”) and Mr. Rambo was taken into custody and has since been

in jail.

4. Thereafter Chintu’s medical examination was conducted at SUPERMAN

MEDICAL HOSPITAL. Upon Chintu’s medical examination the doctor issued a

Medicolegal Certificate being MLC no. 98765/18 wherein he noted “THERE

ARE NO SIGNS WHICH SUGGESTS INSERTION OF PENIS OR PENIS LIKE

OBJECT INTO ANAL CAVITY. CERTAIN REDDISHNESS OBSERVED AROUND

THE ANAL CAVITY”.

5. The Prosecuting Agency conducted investigation and recorded statements of

Chintu, his mother, father, Mr. Raja and Mr. Hari under Section 161 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC, 1973”). Further Chintu’s statement

under Section 164 of CrPC, 1973 was recorded wherein he narrated the

abovementioned incident. Thereafter Chargesheet (Final Report under

Section 173 of CrPC, 1973) dated 10.03.2017 for the offences punishable

under Section 377 and Section 511 of the IPC, 1860 and Section 6 of the

POCSO Act was filed in the Court of the Ld. Additional Session Judge, Delhi

(“Ld. ASJ”).

6. The Ld. ASJ was pleased to take cognizance of the offences as alleged within

the said Final Report. Mr. Rambo pleaded not guilty and the Ld. ASJ proceeded

to frame charges against Mr. Rambo under Section 6 read with Section 5 of

the POCSO, 2012 and under Section 377 and Section 511 of the IPC.

7. Mr. Rambo filed a bail application alongwith an application requesting the

Prosecuting Agency to conduct the Polygraph/Narco-analysis/Brain Mapping

 Test in order to rebut the presumption against himself. The Ld. ASJ relying

upon Section 29 read with Section 30 of POCSO, 2012 rejected the bail

application filed by Mr. Rambo. The Ld. ASJ dismissed the application under

Section 173(8) CrPC, 1973 seeking that his Polygraph/Narco-analysis/Brain

Mapping Test be conducted stating that the same was inadmissible.

8. During the trial, the evidence of all the prosecution witnesses namely, PW 1

Chintu’s mother (narrated that Chintu came home crying and narrated the

alleged incident), PW 2 Chintu’s father (narrated that Chintu came home

crying and narrated the alleged incident), PW3 Chintu (narrated the alleged

incident), PW 4 Hari (narrated that Chintu left home crying), PW 5 Raja

(narrated that Chintu left home crying), PW 6 the Doctor (exhibited the

Medicolegal Report) and PW 7 the Investigating Officer (narrated the entire

process of investigation and exhibited all arrest memos, seizure memos, site

plan etc) was recorded. It may be noted, that since Chintu was in a private

tuition, only he narrated the alleged incident in his evidence, all the other

witnesses only attested to his conduct upon him leaving Mr. Rambo’s house.

9. During cross examination, Chintu narrated that he had failed to do his

homework as given by Mr. Rambo on 11.01.2017. Chintu’s parents denied

having any altercation with Mr. Rambo regarding fees. The fees register

seized during investigation from Mr. Rambo’s house indicates that Chintu’s

parents have not paid fees for the last five months.

10. In his statement under Section 313 of the CrPC, 1973, Mr. Rambo stated that

he did not do the alleged act, and that he had been falsely accused of the said
 offence on account of the altercation between Mr. Rambo and Chintu’s parents

regarding his fees, and that he had slapped Chintu as he had not done the

homework given to him on 11.01.2017.

11. Thereafter realizing that on account of the presumption under Section 29

read with Section 30 it would be impossible to prove the negative that the

alleged act had never taken place, Mr. Rambo approached the Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

challenging the vires of Section 29 and Section 30 of the POCSO, 2012. Further,

in alternative Mr. Rambo prayed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India to

allow him to conduct a Polygraph/Narco-analysis/Brain Mapping Test in

order to prove his innocence.

12. On the first date of hearing i.e. 18.02.2018 notice was issued to the Union of

India and eight week time was granted for completion of pleadings. Pursuant

to the completion of pleadings on 20.04.2018 parties were heard by the

Hon’ble Court and the matter is put up for arguments from 17.08.2018 to

19.08.2018. Further, the parties are required to provide written submissions

in support of their arguments on the following issues:

a. Whether Section 29 and Section 30 of the POCSO, 2012 are in violation

of fundamental rights of Mr. Rambo?

b. In alternative whether Mr. Rambo can be permitted to conduct a

voluntary Polygraph/Narco-analysis/Brain Mapping Test in order to

prove his innocence?