COURT DIARY

INTERNSHIP REPORT

FACULTY OF LAW
LAW CENTRE – II

UNDER THE GUIDENCE AND SUPERVISION OF

V***** k*****
Advocate On Record
Supreme Court Of India

Submitted To : Submitted By:

Associate Professor : H******* S*****
Dr. Vageshwari Deswal Sec – **, Roll No – 1*****
Law Centre-II ,
Faculty Of Law
University Of Delhi
 DECLARATION

This declaration is made regarding the internship report which has been prepared and drafted
by H****** S***** under the supervision of Adv. V**** K*****, Advocate On Record at
Supreme Court Of India, Chamber No.2**, New Lawyers’ Chamber, Supreme Court of
India, Delhi-110001. It contains the work accomplished during the internship which was
assigned during the internship. This work was done in respect of the partial fulfillment of the
requirement for the award of degree of LL.B.

This internship report has not been submitted either in whole or in part to any other Law
University or affiliated Institute under University of Delhi, recognized by the Bar Council of
India for the award of any law degree or diploma within the territory of India.

H******* S****** Dated: November 21,

2017 Roll No -1******
Year-III, Semester- V
Law Centre-II (Faculty Of law)
University Of Delhi.

1 | Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the outset, I would like to thank God for his blessings and benevolently granting me vigor
and audacity to complete my internship successfully. Before submitting my detailed
report/dirary on internship, I find an opportunity to place on record my warm gratitude
towards (Dr.) V.K.Ahuja Associate Professor In Charge Law Centre-II, University of Delhi,
Assistant Prof. (Dr.) Vageshwari Deswal our respected teachers to encourage us towards
Intership and how to perform our duty under Intership. I would like to place my warm
gratitude towards Adv.V***** K***** (A.O.R) under whom, I completed my internship and
I gained a detailed and useful experience for the purpose of Internship as well as for
profession of advocacy in near future. This is to express gratitude towards a person who
guided and motivated me throughout my internship period. It gives me immense pleasure to
acknowledge my indebtedness and deep sense of gratitude and respect to Mr. N*****
A***** without whose constant guidance, this internship would have not been possible. I am
thankful to him for his invaluable teachings and advice given to me, for helping me in
exploring and understanding the legal drafting preparation for cases and research
methodology better

H******* S*******
Place: New Delhi Dated: 21st November , 2017

2 | Page
 CERTIFICATE

The document attached herein are the true copy of the certificate received in lieu of the work
undertaken during the course of my internship and the drafts prepared by me for the drafting
purposes.

Dated: November, 2017

3 | Page
 INTRODUCTION

Clinical education program for law students have been available for many years in some
Indian Law Schools. The objective of such programs is to provide an understanding of the
human , social , and policy contexts of law and legal practice.

Internship fulfill an important component of both academic and practical education in law.
The integration of professional experience into the learning process is highly effective in
developing your understanding of the law in actions, as you are able to observe and perceive
the relevance and application of theory to practice. Consequently, the program is not simply
‘work experience’ but a significant educational experience.

In a workspace setting you will be exposed to the reality of the practice of law in all its
dimensions – the integration of different areas of law, policy issues; the application and
development of skills to analysis and resolution of client concerns; ethical responses to
situations which arises unexpectedly and spontaneously; issues of professional responsibility
including responsibility to clients and case management; and the operation of the government
and court system in the legal process.

Since the inception of LL.B program at the Faculty Of Law-University Of Delhi , a practical
experience component i.e. internship has been part of the compulsory subject and thus of the
LL.B degree. The Legal Internship Program is not designed to teach students how to be good
lawyers (or how to be lawyers at all) it takes more than study at University to do that. The
objectives are to

 Expose you to the law in operation in contexts where you will come to perceive
aspects of law which cannot be learned from reading or hearing about it ;

 Allow you to perceive ways in which the formal learning you acquire at University
may be applied in practice and thereof to develop an appreciation of the practical
dimensions of legal principals;

4 | Page
  Enable you to relate the different areas of legal practice to the importance of
developing the skills of legal research, communication, drafting, practice management
and problem-solving ; and

 Enable you to observe and reflect upon the values, ethical standards and conduct of
the legal profession in practice and to develop your own attitudes of professional
responsibility.

The classroom study and practical training in the field of law is considered as two sides of
coin. The legal profession is one of the professions which are considered incomplete without
the practical training. An additional benefit of the internship program is that ot provides you
with an opportunity to observe the way in which law operates in a practical milieu, and so
may assist you in making future career choices.

5 | Page
 INDEX

S. No. List Of Cases Page No.

1. C.B.I VS. SH. R.S.GARG 09

2. ABC VS.XYZ 10

3. C.B.I VS MAHESH KUMAR & ORS 11

4. SANJAY SHARMA VS. VOLTAS 12

6. ANIL KUMAR VS. AJAY KUMAR AND ORS. 12

DALJIT VS. RACHIT EXPORTS
7. 13

8. NAVNEET RATHIVS. ATUL GARMENTS 13

9. AMIRCHAND VS. MANOHAR LAL 14

10. BALJIT SINGH VS. BALJEET SINGH 15

11. BALJEET SINGHVS.ASHOK KUMAR AND ANR. 16

MAHIPAL SHARMA VS BEENA SANWARIA
12. 16

13. NAVEEN KUMAR JAIN VS.AMIT CHAUHAN 17

14. SUNIL YADAV VS. JAI KISHAN 18

15. STATE VS. SHATUN BEGUM & Ors 19

16. STATE VS. RINKU PAL SINGH & Ors 20

6 | Page
17 C.B.I. Vs. M/s DWARKADHISH SPINNERS LIMITED etc. 21

28 STATE Vs. RAVI S/o SH.JAI SINGH 22

INTERNSHIP REPORT
(17th August to 23rd October 2017)

As per our syllabus, I may classify this internship diary in to two components : 1. the factual
and analytical information about your internship (2) drafting of legal documents.

DAILY INTERNSHIP DUTIES:

1. I was assigned to read minimum of four case files to learn how files are maintained
and how the records are maintained.

2. I was assigned to observe the proceedings during the Examination-in- chief, Cross-
Examination and Final Arguments

3. Supporting the lawyers that come into the office and program. Sitting in on meetings
and appointments and offering required assistance.

4. Office type organizational work – photocopying, organizing papers, keeping files in

order, organizing the desk.

5. Reading any suggested law related materials for my own benefit.

6. Helping clients if possible and if I am able to since I don’t know much about the field
yet.

7. Interacting to various lawyers in our office.

8. Research on judgments that are related to facts of case.

7 | Page
ENTRY NO.1

DATED: 17.08.2017

IN THE COURT OF ARUN BHARADWAJ, SPECIAL JUDGE (PC ACT) : CBI-5,

PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

C.B.I…….. VS.
SH.R.S.GARG

Ld. counsel for A-1 has heavily relied on the judgment titled as “A K Ganju versus CBI,
CRL.M.C. No.2384/2011 & Crl. M. A. No.8693/2011 dated 22.11.2013 passed by Hon'ble
Delhi Court as well as judgment titled as “Rita Handa v CBI, 2008 (105) DRJ 331 of
Hon'ble Delhi Court. He has further argued that there is no evidence of conspiracy and A-1
had done duties as per DMC Act.

SECTIONS INVOLVED:

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act.

OBSERVATION:

My senior counsel have pointed out from Para no.16.48 of the chargesheet that specimen
handwritings, signatures/initials of owners Sh. R. S. Garg, Sh. Rajiv Dhiman and two staff
members and some builders were obtained which have been sent to CBI for comparison with
original questioned documents and report is still awaited. Directions be sent to the laboratory
to expedite the report.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 03.10.2017

8 | Page
ENTRY NO 2

DAT
ED : 18.08.2017

I was assigned to observe the counseling the clients with the permission of counsel in at least
two cases. However before this I wish to mention here that client interview and counseling
was also done by the Ld. Judge, in Matrimonial dispute which is pending before the Family
court. However as per direction, I observed the interview and counseling of two clients in two
different cases namely Vipin Tyagi and Roopa Tyagin in case titled as Vipin Tyagi And Roop
Tyagi and Hari Om Sharma and Santan Dharam Sabha Vs K C Bhargwa.

ENTRY NO. 3

DATED: 19.08.2017

IN THE COURT OF ANU GROVAR BALIGA, ADJ,

PATIALA HOUSE COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

ABC VERSUS XYZ

SECTION INVOLVED:

Claim u/s 96 of CPC,1908.

OBSERVATION:

The decree has been passed in the favour of the client so the opposite party of my senior has
filed the appeal against the decree.

The proxy counsel on behalf of my senior requested the court to give time to file the reply to
appeal and also the proxy counsel filed vakalatnama.

9 | Page
NOW THE MATTER IS FIXED FOR 09.11.2017

ENTRY NO. 4

DATED : 22 .08.2017

I was sent to meet a client to get the property transferred from the name of her grandmother
to my clients name via a Will mentioning the details as to the property which was being
transferred. The process was not completed due to not having the sufficient documents at
hand.

ENTRY NO. 5

DATED: 24.08.2017

IN THE COURT OF SH. SUNIL KUMAR, MM , TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

C.B.I VS MAHESH KUMAR

AND ORS

OBSERVATION:

Reply to the application seeking permission to visit abroad filed by applicant / accused no. 4
awaited from CBI. Let reply, if any, be filed on 26.08.2017 at 2 pm.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: Let reply, if any, be filed on 26.08.2017 at 2 pm.

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 26.08.2017

ENTRY NO. 6

10 | P a g e
DATE 26/08/2017

Was assigned research on the topic: Whether a writ is maintainable under article 32 without
going through for the same relief in concerned High Court under article 226. Assigned the
task of briefing of the paper book for the matter titled Tanya Banon Danami Vs. Shome Nikhil
Danami and Ors.

ENTRY NO. 7

DATED: 28.08.2017

CLIENT COMPROMISE

IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM, SAINI ENCLAVE

SANJAY SHARMA V. VOLTAS

OBSERVATION:

Handed over the chequeof rs.5000 to the complainant after settlement and matter was listed
for Lok Adalat.

ENTRY NO.8

DATED: 29.08.2017

IN THE COURT OF ANIL KUMAR SISODIA, ADJ, TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

ANIL KUMAR DHINGRA VS. AJAY KUMAR AND ORS.

11 | P a g e
OBSERVATION:

Claim for specific performance, Permanent injunction and declaration.

My senior was appearing for the plaintiff. The adjournment was granted and next date was
fixed for further arguments.

JUDGMENT/ORDER: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 17.10.2017

ENTRY NO. 9

DATED: 31.08.2017

IN THE COURT OF RAJ KUMAR, ADJ, TIS HAZARI, NEW DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

DALJIT V. RACHIT EXPORTS

OBSERVATION:

Recovery of money amounted 11,80,000.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 26.05.2017

ENTRY NO. 10

DATED: 01.09.2017

IN THE COURT OFANURAG JAIN, ADJ, KARKADOOMA COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

NAVNEET RATHI VS. ATUL GARMENTS

12 | P a g e
SECTIONS INVOLVED:

Application Under Order 9, Rule 9 CPC, 1908

Suit for Recovery of money amounted 13,13,107.

OBSERVATION:

Appearing on behalf of the plaintiff.

Service of Notice affected to D 2, D3 and for D1. Direction for issue of fresh notice was given
ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

N.D.O.H.: 26.09.2017

ENTRY NO. 11

DATED: 01.09.2017

IN THE COURT OF SH. V.K. JAIN, CJ, TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

AMIRCHAND VS. MANOHAR LAL

SECTION INVOLVED:

Suit for permanent injunction.

COURT OBSERVATION:

cross examination was to be held but the plaintiff offered the compensation in case. The
matter was adjourned for a further date.

JUDGMENT/ORDER: PENDING

NEXT DATE OF HEARING: 27.10.2017

ENTRY NO. 12
DATED : 04.09.2017

13 | P a g e
Was assigned to assist associates on drafting a counter affidavit of the pre-emption petition
titled Suresh Prasad and others versus State of Bihar C.W.J.C No. 2398/2004

ENTRY NO. 13
DATED : 06.09.2017
The drafting of the case was still needed to be done. Went to meet a client as well with the
associate and heard about the issue in the matter. Later on, discussed the case law and the
various charges to be framed under IPC, started drafting work of the pending case law.
Also I was instructed to draft an anticipatory bail in the same matter.

ENTRY NO. 14

DATED: 07.09.2017

IN THE COURT OF SUDESH KUMAR SETHI, CJ ,KARKADOOMA COURT,

DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

BALJIT SINGH VS. BALJEET SINGH

SECTION INVOLVED:

SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF MONEY

GENERAL OBSERVATION:

SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 1,67,000.

Prosecution witness was present. Brought the original airway bill. His statement was recorded
and discharged.

ENTRY NO.15

DATED: 16.09.2017

14 | P a g e
 FAMILY COURT, SAKET, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

NISHA SHARMA

VERSUS
ANUPAM SHARMA

OBSERVATION:

My senior counsel was representing Nisha Sharma. The defendant paid the cheque of
Rs.2000 to the appellant for the cost imposed upon the defendant by the Honourable court.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

NOW THE MATTER IS FIXED FOR 9.06.2017.

ENTRY NO. 16

DATED: 18.09.2017

IN THE COURT OF HARISH KUMAR,TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

BALJEET SINGH

VERSUS

ASHOK KUMAR AND ANR.

COURT OBSERVATION:

Suit for recovery of amount Rs. 10,00,000.

The defendant was called to appear before the court with his bill books. The defendant was
admitted in hospital so he could not appear.

STATUS: PENDING.

N.D.O.H.: 13.10.2017

ENTRY NO.17

15 | P a g e
 DATED: 22.09.2017

IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE , FAMILY COURT, DELHI

MAHIPAL SHARMA ….. PETITIONER NO.1

Vs.

BEENA SANWARIA……. PETITIONER NO.2

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE:

Divorce petition u/s 13B(1) of HMA.

OBSERVATION:

Only a petition was filed. Court gave order to wait for a mandatory period of 6-18 months.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

ENTRY NO.18

DATED: 23.09.2017

Assigned a work of translation of a order of District Magistrate regarding the restriction and
checks in the cases of illegal sand mining in Gonda district of Uttar Pradesh
Was assigned to make notes on Epistolary Jurisdiction exercised by the Hon’ble Courts. The
task took around first half under which I had studied various Case laws and theories of
eminent legal personalities. Read the Article 226 and Article 32 for the purpose and done with
the notes on Public Interest Litigation and the exercised of appellate courts over subordinate
courts.

ENTRY NO.19

DATED : 03.10.2017

16 | P a g e
 IN THE COURT OF MS. ROSHNI GUPTA, M.M., TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF:

NAVEEN KUMAR JAIN …COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

AMIT CHAUHAN …RESPONDENTS

SECTION INVOLVED:

U/S 200 OF CR.P.C.R/W 155(4) C.P.C.

OBSERVATION:

The complaint was filed for adultery against the accused. The arguments have been addressed
by the counsels of complainant and respondent.

ORDER/JUDGMENT: PENDING

NOW THE MATTER IS FIXED FOR 10.08.2017.

ENTRY NO. 20

DATED: 23.09.2017

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, Delhi

In the matter of : SUNIL YADAV V. JAI KISHAN

Observation: Matter involving recovery of money and damage for the faulty product sold to
our client. Further date was given for the hearing as our counsel was not able to reach on
time. I was asked by my counsel to go to the court room and ask for the matter to be listed
last that day. The honorable judge did not agree.

ENTRY NO. 21

DATED:03.10.2017

17 | P a g e
Was sent to the High court for filing activity of the suit at hand and to get the service copies
of the files. There after was get the service of another case file done on the same day.

Was made to draft a legal notice on behalf of our client to get the money for the products
delivered which the other party had not paid.

ENTRY NO. 22

DATED:06.10.2017
Assigned a work to study a file titled Monika Singh versus State of Bihar Cr. Misc. 26599 of
2015 for drafting a special leave petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court

ENTRY NO. 23
DATED:07.10.2017
Assigned to darft a legal notice to a Management of Hotel named Hotel Sea Princess,
Mumbai for adopting appropriate measures to recover stolen ipad during the stay of the
client.

ENTRY NO. 24
DATED:09.10.2017
SC No. 112/17 FIR No. 02/2017 PS Vasant Kunj (N)
State v. Shahtun Begum & Ors.
09.10.2017
Present: Sh. Kamal Akhtar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Both accused produced from
JC. Sh. M K Perwez, Ld. Counsel for the accused.
PW6 Sh. Israr Babu, Nodal Officer was bound down for today for his
crossexamination.
He is present and has been duly cross examined and he now stands discharged.Prosecution ha
d also summoned ASI Dharampal and Ct. Kanta for today but both of these witnesses have
not appeared. W/Ct. Kanta is reported to be unwell. As regards ASI

18 | P a g e
Dharmampal, summons sent to him have been returned back unserved with report
that he is remaining absent from duty.
No other PW is present today. This case will now be taken up on 24.10.2017 for
remaining PE, the date already fixed.
(Anu Grover Baliga)
ASJ/FTC/Court No.7/PHC
Lockup Building/09.10.2017

ENTRY NO. 25
DATED: 09.10.2017

• Continued the process of drafting the petition. Was assigned the task to research for case
laws on grounds for quashing of FIR. Was assigned the task to draft a Writ Petition for
quashing of F.I.R. No. 54/2012 under section 482 in the matter titled Sarabjit Singh vs. State.

ENTRY NO. 26
DATED : 11.10.2017
SC No. 110/2017
FIR No. 1004/2015
PS Vasant Kunj (N)
State v. Rinku Pal Singh & Ors.
Present:Sh. Kamal Akhtar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.All four accused are present on bail wit
h Ms. Nisha, Ld. Proxy counsel for accused persons. Ms. Purnima, Ld. Counsel from DCW.
Today a report has been filed on behalf of SI Sandeep from PS Vasant Kunj (N)giving therein
the fresh address of the prosecutrix and a report that she has been served. Theprosecutrix is al
so present in the court. She has been examined as PW1. However she is not beingcross exami

19 | P a g e
ned by the accused persons on the ground that their counsel is not available today. Ld.
Proxy Counsel Ms. Nisha has informed this court that infact the accused persons had taken a
way the
brief from the Ld. Counsel Sh. Anoop Gupta and told him that they will be engaging another
counsel
and it is only today that they have told him that they would want him to represent them again.
It is
being further submitted that Sh. Anoop Gupta is not available today as he is busy in Tis Haza
ri Court.
In the considered opinion of this court though Ms. Nisha is correctly submitting that the Ld. c
ounsel
Sh. Anoop Gupta cannot be faulted with for not being available, the accused persons will hav
e to pay
cost to the prosecutrix as it is their fault that the prosecutrix is not being cross examined today
. Accordingly, each of the accused persons will pay a cost of Rs. 5000/-
to the prosecutrix and she is now bound down for her crossexamination on 06.12.2017-
the date has been given specifically as per
the request of the prosecutrix who states that she is working and has a job in Gurgaon and tha
t it is
not possible for her to take leave frequently and that she will be now available only on 06.12.
2017. It is
made clear that on this date, the cost imposed on the accused persons will be paid to the pros
ecutrix by them.
(Anu Grover Baliga)
ASJ/FTC/Court No.7/PHC
Lockup Building/11.10.2017

ENTRY NO. 27
DATED: 12.10.2017
CC No. 05/14 RC No. BDI/2009/E0008/BS & FC/New Delhi
CBI Vs. M/s Dwarkadhish Spinners Limited etc.
13.04.2017
Present: Sh. K.P. Singh, learned PP for CBI. Proceedings against A-8 R.K. Murgai have
already been abated. A-7 P.K. Dutta, A-9 Ravi Prakash, A-10 S.K. Sharma and A-11 M.C.
Sethi have already been discharged. A-1 H.B. Chaturvedi and A-6 Bikash Basu @ B. Basu on
bail are absent. Remaining accused i.e. Amit Chaturvedi, Sanjay Chaturvedi and Pravin
Juneja are present on bail. Accused no.5 M/s Dwarkadhish Spinners Ltd. is represented by
accused no.2. Sh. Pradeep Singh, Advocate for A-1 H.B. Chaturvedi, A-2 Amit Chaturvedi,
A-3 Sanjay Chaturvedi and A-5 M/s Dwarkadhish Spinners Limited. Sh. Aman Kochar,
Advocate for A-4 Pravin Juenja. Sh. Dharmender Kumar Verma, Advocate for A-6 Bikash
Basu.

20 | P a g e
Matter is fixed for recording of evidence of the prosecution today. Applications have been
moved on behalf of A-1 H.B. Chaturvedi and A-6 Bikash Basu @ B. Basu seeking exemption
from personal appearance on the ground of ailments. It is further stated that there is no
objection to recording of evidence in their absence and no dispute regarding their identity will
be raised. Heard. Exemptions are allowed on the said statements. Sh. Kapil Aggarwal is
partly examined in chief as PW4. His further examination in chief is deferred as certain
documents are not traceable. He is bound down for 27.04.2017. PW Sushil Kumar Jain
unserved with the report that he was tenant and has left the premises 5 to 6 years ago. List the
matter for RPE on 24.04.2017, the date already fixed and for cross-examination of PW4 on
27.04.2017.
(REETESH SINGH)
Special Judge (PC Act):
CBI-05 New Delhi : 12.10.2017

ENTRY NO. 28
DATED:12.10.2017
• Was assigned the task to draft a Writ Petition for quashing of F.I.R. No. 54/2012 under
section 482 in the matter titled Sarabjit Singh vs. State. Was assigned the task to research on
the topic of renewal of lapsed patent due to nonpaymentof fee, under the Patents Act, 1970
Continued the task to research on the topic “What constitutes a publication of anartwork
under the Copyright Act, 1957”, pertaining to a specific issue at hand in arelated matter.

ENTRY NO. 29
DATED: 23.10.2017
IN THE COURT OF MS. ANU GROVER BALIGA
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/SPL. FAST TRACK COURT
PATIALA HOUSE COURT/NEW DELHI
SC No.9168/2016
FIR No. 304/2014
PS Inderpuri
U/s. 323/376/506 IPC
State Vs. Ravi S/o. Sh. Jai Singh
R/o. H. No. N250, JJ Colony,

21 | P a g e
 Raghubir Nagar, Delhi.
Date of Institution – 15.11.2014
Date of Committal – 11.02.2015
Arguments heard/Order reserved – 23.10.2017
Date of judgment – 23.10.2017
Final order – Acquittal JUDGEMENT
1.The accused has been facing trial in the present case for having
committed the offences punishable U/s. 323/376(2)(n)/506 of Indian Penal
Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').
2. The charges in the present case were framed on the complaint of the prosecutrix that the
accused had been repeatedly raping her w.e.f.
13.11.2013 to June, 2014 on the promise of marrying her but that eventually
he had refused to marry her and that he had also criminally intimidated her.
However, when the prosecutrix had appeared for her deposition in court on
15.04.2015, she stated before the court that she had lodged a complaint out
of anger and due to some misunderstanding and that she has now already got married with
the accused on 03.10.2014 and since then has been
residing with the accused in her inlaws house happily.
3. The case was today fixed for recording of statement of accused under section 313 CrPC
however, Ld. Defence Counsel has prayed that the
recording of the said statement be dispensed with, for the prosecutrix has
turned hostile in this case and according to him, no fruitful purpose would
be served in continuing with this trial any further.
4.On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP for the State has pointed out that the
prosecutrix in her cross examination by Ld. Addl. PP for the state has
reiterated some allegations which were initially made by her in her police complaint.
5.In rebuttal, it is submitted by the Ld. Defence counsel that if the
cross examination of the Ld. PP for the State is being read, then the cross examination
conducted by the defence should also be read and his
submission is that if the evidence of the prosecutrix is read in entirety, it
will be clear that she has not made out any allegation which makes out the
offence of rape against the accused. It is further being submitted that the prosecutrix and
accused are already married and are leading a happy
married life and therefore it is being prayed that the trail be not continued any further. 6.
No doubt as pointed out by the Ld. PP in the crossexamination
conducted by the then Ld. PP the prosecutrix has deposed that she had not
wanted to have sexual relationship with the accused prior to marriage but
since the accused insisted on the same, she was forced to have physical
relationship with him prior to marriage. However, it is to be noted that the
prosecutrix in her crossexamination by the defence has again reiterated

22 | P a g e
that she was having a consensual love affair with the accused and during
the said affair she had even kept the karva chauth fast and other religious
rituals and had started treated the accused as her husband. She has also admitted that on 1-
2 occasions physical relations were established between
her and the accused prior to their marriage and she had not made any complaint then and
had chosen to make the complaint only when the
accused had refused to marry her. In the considered opinion of this court, in
view of the such statements given by the prosecutrix, the accused cannot be
at all convicted for the offence of rape or of criminal intimidation (it is
relevant to mention that as regards the offence of criminal intimidation
neither in her chief nor in her crossexamination has the prosecutrix uttered
a word that she was ever threatened by the accused). 7.
In the considered opinion of this court and in view of the fact that the
prosecutrix has turned hostile and now both the prosecutrix and the accused
are married, no fruitful purpose would be served with continuing the trial
of this case any further. As such, the recording of the statement of accused U/s. 313
Cr.P.C. is hereby dispensed with and at this stage itself, the
accused hereby stands acquitted for the offences for which he has faced trial.
Announced in Open Court On 23rd of October, 2017
(Anu Grover Baliga)
Court No.7, Lock UP Building
ASJ / FTC / PHC / NDD
New Delhi /23.10.2017

EXPERIENCE DURING THE INTERNSHIP

The District Court in reality is different from the court generally shown in the Movies. In
movies the job of lawyer is more similar to a detective which is a far cry from the reality. The
job of a lawyer is only to assist a party in a suit regarding the proceedings and appear before
Judge on his behalf. Every lawyer maintains a court diary, which proved handy and very
useful as all the details of the case are entered in the diary with proper date and its petition
number. It proves to be useful, as respective cases are recorded by the lawyer date wise and it
saves time to think and search of the cases as per the present date. During my internship, I

23 | P a g e
learned to maintain the lawyer’s diary. It was a learning experience as Juniors take one year
for learning the court proceedings which I could learn during the period of internship.
Though one month was not sufficient but it was enough to learn about the basis. Basics can
be learned only in trial court. I have learned the basics of drafting. I could get to know about
Fast Track Court and LokAdalat which is an emerging concept. I really tried hard to learn. It
was adventurous for me as everything was unpredictable. Every client comes with a new
case, new situation, a new problem and which doesn’t have any perfect answer. I also
experienced the expressions and thoughts of the Hon’ble Judges. When they are in good
mood, they will tell you how to do the things correctly but if not then they will scold you for
the simple mistakes you have done. About advocates I experiences that it is not easy to work
as an advocate, it requires a lot of dedication and hard work, only then you can achieve
success, and most importantly social recognition.

In the office I learned all the official work, filing Talwana, Vakalatnama etc. All these
documents are very important and an advocate must know how to fill them and use them,
Talwana is used for many things such as for issuing attach warrant, issuing notices etc.

I also learned that it is very important to be always reading cases and new enactments, keep
yourself always sound minded, and while dealing with a case read the facts of the case very
carefully and try to find all the loopholes and then use them in your favor, also while cross
questioning with the witness never allow him/her to be confident ask them twisted questions
so that they become nervous and are not able to answer properly.

24 | P a g e
 PART- II

DRAFTED DOCUMENTS

DOCUMENT 1.

BEFORE THE HON'BLE COURT OF SH. ARUN KUMAR ARYA:

PRESIDING OFFICER-FAMILY COURT, PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW
DELHI

25 | P a g e
 HMA CASE NO.354/2016

IN THE MATTER OF: -

SHEREEN ….PETITIONER

VERSUS

RISHANT JAIN ….RESPONDENT

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT UNDER

SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR

DIRECTION TO THE PETITIONER IN VIEW OF ORDER

DATED 10.08.2016 FOR HANDING OVER THE CHILDREN FOR

CELEBRATION OF THE BIRTHDAY OF CHILD i.e Master

VIVAAN ON 15.05.2017.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

1. That the Petitioner had instituted petition under section 13(1)(i)(a) of Hindu

Marriage Act alleging various acts of cruelty on her by the Respondent.

26 | P a g e
2. That upon issuance of summons of this Hon'ble Court the Respondent put in

his appearance on 10.08.2016 before this Hon'ble Court and filed his written

statement.

3. That the Petitioner and Respondent got wedded as per Hindu Rites and

Customs on 05.12.2002 in AryaSamajMandir at VasantKunj, New Delhi and

from the said marriage wedlock two children is born on 22.07.2005 and

05.05.2011 named Shreya Jain and Vivank Jain respectively.

4. That dispute between the parties arose on 04.08.2015 and the Petitioner left

with her parents and admittedly both the children are residing with the

Petitioner since then at the parental home of the Petitioner. It is further admitted

fact during the period from 04.08.2015 the Respondent regularly meeting with

his children and even going out of station with children.

5. That the basic dispute between the parties relates to one Mr. ManasArora who

is maligning the mind of the Petitioner resultantly the relation between the

Petitioner and Respondent got strained and the same reached to this stage that

parties are before this Hon'ble Court.

6. That the Respondent forced to institute a petition under section 497 and other

section of Indian Penal Code against the accused Manas Arora who has made

dangerous efforts to spoil the relation between the Petitioner and the

27 | P a g e
 Respondent and succeeded to a great extent. The Hon'ble Court of Sh. Naresh

Kumar Laka passed following orders on the complaint of the Respondent

which reads as under: -

“….Submissions heard. Let status be called from concerned SHO on the

complaint in terms of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

LalitaKumari Versus State.

Another application seeking preservation/seizure of call details of

mobile numbers i.e. 9654600372, 9711412821 & 9910072158 has been

filed. It is stated that this application is very urgent. Accordingly,

arguments heard.

As the allegations of the adultery have been leveled in the present case, I

am of the opinion that if no direction is given to preserve/seize the call

details, the complainant May lose the valuable piece of the evidence. It

is also the general practice that such call details are not provided to the

individual private person. The application is seeking registration of FIR

may take sufficient time as it requires calling of status report from SHO.

Accordingly application seeking preservation/seizure of call details is

allowed with the condition that Complainant will file relevant details of

the concerned service provider alongwith PF. On filing of the same,

copy of this order and copy of application be sent to the concerned

service providers with the direction to preserve the call details of the

28 | P a g e
 above mentioned respective mobile number for the period as mentioned

in the application with Tower location and IMEI number.

That due to constant intervention of the accused ManasArora the Petitioner is

acting on his ill advice and not permitting the Respondent to even meet his

children which is giving immense pain and torture. The Petitioner even not

hesitating in violating the order dated 10.08.2016 as passed by this Hon'ble

Court. That an application has already been moved in this regard by the

Respondent and same is pending subjudice before the Hon'ble Court for

adjudication.

7. That through the earlier application the Petitioner had sought various prayers

related to regular meeting and comfortable interaction with his children hence

the prayer and relief sought from this Hon'ble Court through the earlier

application are not reproduced in this application in order to avoid multiplicity

of pleading and same be read as part and parcel to this application as well.

8. That since last more than five months the Respondent is unable to live and

celebrate with his children any of the festival and occasion. It is submitted that

on 5.05.2015 the child of the respondent named Master vivaan have birthday

and the respondent want to celebrate this auspicious occasion with his children.

It is further submitting that the respondent wants to take the children out of

station for celebrating his birthday. It is further submitting that the on

04.05.2015 have Friday and on 05.05.2015 have Saturday. The respondent

29 | P a g e
 wants to take the children out of station for celebrating the birthday on the

Friday after attending the school by the children. It is further submitting that

respondent want to take the children on Friday after attending the school by

which children will not lose their study and after it have Saturday on which

school will remain closed. It is further submitted that the birthday of the

children are very auspicious occasion for the father and every father wants to

celebrate and enjoy this occasion with their children. It is further submitting

that without the presence of the children the respondent has no meaning for that

day. It is further submitting that the after celebrating the birthday the

respondent will hand over the children to the petitioner on 06.05.2017. The

respondent is seeking the permission to take his children for celebrating the

birthday of the child from this Hon’ble court and standing before this Hon’ble

for his folded hand, the Hon’ble court may grant the permission to the

respondent to take the children for three day i.e 04.05.2017 to 06.05.2017.
9. That the respondent has already filed the application for the custody of the

children U/s section 26 of H.M.A which is pending for the disposal.

PRAYER: -

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon'ble Court that

Petitioner be directed to hand over the children for three days from 04.05.2017 till

06.05.2017 to celebrate the birthday of the child named MaasterVivaanand the

Respondent undertakes that he will hand over the children in the evening on

05.05.2017. It is prayed accordingly.

30 | P a g e
 RESPONDENT
(RISHANT JAIN)

THROUGH

PLACE: - DELHI.
DATED: -

(V****** K******)
ADVOCATE ON RECORD
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
NEW LAWYERS CHAMBER NO.2**
M.C.SHITALVAD BLOCK,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,
NEW DELHI -110001
TEL 0120-2******,
25****** , M. NO. 9*******.

DOCUMENT 2.

31 | P a g e
 BEORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

CO.PETITION 553/2016

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/S CLASSIC SWITCHGEAR & CONTROL

PVT. LTD : PETITIONER

VERSUS

M/S VXL REALTORS PVT. LTD & ORS : RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 448 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, FOR

APPOINTMENT OF OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The petitioner is into the business of manufacturing, assembling and marketing of

electrical products and had preferred the present petition for winding up of the

Respondent company.

2. That the respondent no.2 and 3 directors of respondent no.1 and are engaged into the

business of construction of turnkey projects and are responsible for the decisions of

respondent no.1.

3. That the respondent no.1 through respondent no.2 and 3 approached petitioner

company for supply of one main LT Panel for their project Eastern Heights, Nyay

32 | P a g e
 Khand-III, Indrapuram, Ghaziabad, U.P and also approached for supply of AMF Panel

for 250 KVA D.G a Eastern Gates, GH-3, Sector-4G, Vasundhara, Ghaziabad through

two purchase orders having purchase orders no. VXL/EG/2012/0031 &

VXL/EG/2012/0031 both dated 24.05.2012 and 16.05.2012 respectively and said

purchase order also received through email dated 17.05.2012 and 24.05.2012.

4. That against the said purchase order the petitioner supplied the same through Invoice

no. 005 dated 04.06.2015 for a sum of Rs. 2,27,000.00 and through invoice no. 009

dated 05.07.2012 for a sum of Rs. 12,62,550.00 and both stand supplied to the

satisfaction of the respondents and VAT dues stand paid by the petitioner and even

same is utilized by the respondents.

5. The against the said supply of goods the respondent made part payment from time to

time and lastly paid on 20.05.2016 thereby part payment made of Rs. 8, 27,000.00 out

of the total liability of Rs. 14, 89,550.00 and the respondents are under the liability for

sum of Rs. 6,62,550.00/- in favour of the petitioner company.

6. That the petitioner company sent remainders to the respondents for making payment

of balance outstanding through email dated 02.02.2013 and 26.02.2013.

7. That the last payment of Rs. 47,000.00 was paid when the respondents were served

with personal notice dated 02.03.2013. after it the petitioner again sent many

remainders but they had not responded, hence the respondents were served with the

notice on 02.06.2014 through the speed post on 04.06.2014 and asked for the payment

for the said outstanding amount of Rs. 6,62,550.00/-.

8. That having no option, the petitioner company has finally sent a legal notice as per the

statutory requirement of companies act, 1956 on 23.04.2016 calling upon the

respondents to make the payment to the tune of Rs. 13, 58,125.00/- which is inclusive

33 | P a g e
 of interest of Rs. 6, 95,625.00/- along with principal outstanding of Rs. 6, 62,625.00/-

along with principal outstanding of Rs. 6, 62,550.00/- within 21 days from the receipt

of notice on all the available addresses of the respondents. The said legal notice also

tried to serve on the Email-ID of the respondents company but same got failed.

9. That as per the statement of ledger account, a sum of Rs. 13,58,125.00/- inclusive of

Rs. 6,62,550.00/- towards principal and interest thereon of Rs. 6,95,625.00/-

calculated till 20.04.2016 @ 3% per month is due to respondent company which is

unpaid till date. The respondent no.1 company has failed, neglected and refused to

pay the said sum of Rs. 13,58,125.00/- or any portion thereof.

10. Hence the petitioner filed the present suit. The Hon’ble court passed the interim order

in favour of petitioner vides order dated 27.09.2016. The petitioner is always obliged

for kindness act of the Hon’ble court for passing the interim order in the favour of the

petitioner

11. That the petitioner is praying for appointing the official liquidator to take the

proceeding qua the respondents.

12. This application is bona fide and for the ends of justice.

PRAYER :-

The Petitioner Company, therefore, most humbly prays Your Lordships for the following

orders:

a) That the Hon’ble court may appoint the proper person as official liquidator to take

the charge of the business affairs and assets of the respondent company with all the

necessary powers under the companies Act, 1956.

b) That the Hon’ble may give direction to attach the moveable and Immovable assets

of the respondent company.

34 | P a g e
 c) That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Official

Liquidator attached to this Hon’ble Court or some other fit and proper person to be

appointed as Provisional Liquidator of the said Company to take charge

immediately of the business affairs and assets of the said Company with all powers

under the Companies Act, 1956.

d) Costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the Official Liquidator to the

Petitioner Company at the first instance out of the sale proceeds of the assets and

properties of the said Company;

e) For such further and other reliefs as in the nature and circumstances of this case

this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.

And your petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.

DATED:
FILED THROUGH
NEW DELHI

(V****** K******)

ADVOCATE ON RECORD
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
NEW LAWYERS CHAMBER NO.2**
M.C.SHITALVAD BLOCK,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA,
NEW DELHI -110001
TEL 0120-2*******,
25***** , M. NO. 9*******.

35 | P a g e