AMITY INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION ___________________________________________________________________________

In the Honble High Court of India

Case Concerning, Honor killing and Culpable Homicide

__________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Shankar .............. (Petitioners) V. State of India . (Respondents)

___________________________________________________________________________ On submission to the Honble High Court At India

___________________________________________________________________________

Memorandum on behalf of the Petitioner State of India

-1-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Index of Authorities3 The Statement of Jurisdiction.4 The Statement of facts5 The Statement of issues..6 The summary of arguments.7 The arguments advanced/detailed arguments.8 The prayer...12

-2-

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES SUPREME COURT DECISIONSGanesh dooley v Emp.1 Bharat v Emp2 Nga Po Tha v Emp. Laxman kalu v State i AIR (1968) SC 1390

BOOKS AND ARTICLES The Indian Penal Code By :- Prof. T. Bhattacharya Honor killings A crime, but not a crime against humanity and why the distinction is important 3

STATUTESThe Indian penal code a) Culpable homicide b) Murder

LIST OF ABBRIEVATIONS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. HonblePara Art. SC HC SCC Govt. Honourable Paragraph Article Supreme court High court Supreme Court Cases Government

1 2 3

(1879) Cal 351 .AIR 1921 Cal 501

Insight in security by google

-3-

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION The High Court of India has the jurisdiction to decide upon this case relating to murder and culpable homicide under the section 299 and 300 of the Indian Penal Code. The parties to the dispute i.e. State of India and Mr. Shankar and others are bound to follow the conclusion of the High Court due to its jurisdiction.

-4-

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Mr. Shankar has brutally slain his daughter, Miss Ramiya since she had fallen in love with a man who did not belong to their community. Such an act was considered to be modern and not accepted by her family elders. It was thought to be bringing shame to the family reputation. 2. The death was very cruel and ruthlessly planned. Miss Ramiya was strangled with a boot lace until it choked her and finally led to her death. Then the body was stuffed in a suitcase and the suitcase was buried in a back garden. 3. Few more people were involved in this killing other than Mr. Shankar (52) which includes Mr. Shyam (51), his brother who supported his brother in killing Ramiya. Two other were found during inspections who have pleaded guilty of being a part of this killing. There have been two more suspects who have been missing and have supposedly fled away from the country. 4. The sessions with the family members gave an impression that the young woman was accused of disgracing her familys reputation by ending up her arranged marriage which was although an abusive one. She was criticized of adopting new western or modern thoughts and ideas in her day to day life and one of which was falling in love with a man belonging to a different community. While the trials were going on for three months, there were evidences when Mr. Shankar would beat his daughter for using hairsprays and other western ways which had not been exercised in the family earlier. 5. The elders of the entire family seem to have an orthodox thinking since her uncle once told her that she would have been turned into ashes if she were his daughter and that she had brought great disrespect and shame to the family, as said by her sister Miss Ruhi who was 22 years old. Miss Ramiya was continuously abused and beaten up by her father and uncle and such rebellion has finally costed her life. 6. Such cases of killings in India threaten the security and rights of all individuals in India and need immediate concern. The case of Miss Ramiya encourages the very practice of honor killing.

-5-

ISSUES RAISED

1. Why they are being held guilty of committing murder and not for culpable homicide not amounting to murder? 2. Whether Honor Killing is a kind of offence which should be dealt under IPC or we need a separate piece of legislation to curb this menace? 3. Whether such heinous crimes can be referred to as crime against humanity?

-6-

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I.

It should be held under culpable homicide amounting to murder and not under murder. It is so because it was not a planned murder .She died on her own and we had no intention to kill or murder her, we were just threatening her not to get too westernized as it is according to customs and traditions of my community. We need to have a separate legislation for Honor Killing as people will get confused between murder and culpable homicide. Since honor killing is at an alarming rate so we need to have separate a legislation for it.

II.

III.

These crimes cannot be referred to as crime against humanity as these crimes are being performed to safeguard the interests of their own community. As these people go against the culture of the community and also violate the rules and regulation of the community.

-7-

DETAILED ARGUMENTS

1. WHY THEY ARE BEING HELD GUILTY OF COMMITING MURDER AND NOT FOR CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER? According to section 299 of IPC Culpable Homicide has been defined as Whoever ,causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death or with the intension of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death , or with the knowledge that he is likely by such act to cause death ,commits the offence of culpable homicide . When culpable homicide is not murder Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender whilst deprived of the power of self control by grave and sudden provocation , causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident . Homicide is the most important part of offences affecting life .Even though homicide has not been defined in the code , it means killing of a human being by a human being . It cannot be defined as killing of a person by a person in view of the nature of the definition of the word person in section 11 of the code according to which the word includes any company or association or body of persons ,whether incorporated or not homicide may be lawful or unlawful . The first kind of unlawful homicide has been designed as culpable homicide under section 299 of the code. culpable means blameworthy, faulty or criminal .Since homicide means killing of a human being by a human being , culpable homicide such killing of a human being by a human being as is criminal . In case Laxman kalu v state ,4 The accused went to his father in laws house to bring back his wife and they scheduled to return by the next morning conveyance . In the evening the accused quarrelled with his wifes brother & stabbed him by a knife resulting in death. The medical report said that though the stab was serious it had not penetrated the lung and the death was resulted mainly because the auxiliary artery and veins were snapped which caused shock and haemorrhage. Even though only one blow was given on the chest, it did not fall on a vital part of the chest .

AIR (1968) SC 1390

-8-

The Supreme Court held that in view of the above , it was by chance that the artery was cut , and so the accused did not have any intention , but could be presumed to know the consequences of his act , and was thus guilty under section 3045 . In Ganesh Dooley v Emp.6, the father was accused of culpable homicide.I n this case the accused offered his child to a crocodile in a tank under the superstitious belief that he would be returned unharmed and then would lead a long healthy life, and it was killed in the process , the court held him guilty under section 304 part 2 on the ground that he could be presumed to know that his act was likely to cause death of the child . From the above facts we can come to a conclusion that this case should be taken as a culpable homicide as the act was done not with the intention of killing her but with the intention of threatening her not to get too westernized and to follow the rules and regulations of the community to which we belong .

FROM THE ABOVE FACTS AND REFERENCE CASES WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE CRIME COMMITED BT FATHER IS CULPABLE HOMICIDE AND NOT MURDER SO HE SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR GUILTY OF COMMITING CULPABLE HOMICIDE AND NOT GUILTY OF COMITING MURDER .

5 6

part 2 (1879)5cal 351

-9-

2. WHETHER HONOR KILLING IS A KIND OF OFFENCE WHICH SHOULD BE DEALT UNDER IPC OR DO WE NEED A SEPARATE PIECE OF LEGISLATION TO CURB THIS MENACE ?

Honor killing should be dealt under IPC or there a need for separate legislation to curb the menace. If a separate legislation is not made then a person who has committed culpable homicide will be treated a murderer and will be given more harsh punishments which he should actually get. In the case Ganesh Dooley v Emp7. Case which was mention above, in that case if the father would have been accused of committing a murder of his son then he would have got more harsh punishments than actually what he got . In Laxman kalu v state 8case also if would have not been accused of culpable homicide and also if there was no provision for culpable homicide then the medical report would have stated that the accused has committed a murder and not culpable homicide , he would have been made guilty of the crime which has not been committed by him . If such kind of act is done then the law will become unjust and people will not have belief over the judicial system of their country. Common man believes in the judicial system that they will get justice and expect that the law will give them equal power and help them to over their problem .

7 8

(1879) Cal 351 AIR 1921 Cal 501

- 10 -

3. WHETHER SUCH HEINOUS CRIMES BE REFERRED TO AS CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY?

Such crimes cannot be referred to as crime against humanity. These crimes are done to safeguard the interest of their community and region. These crimes are being committed if people dont follow the customs and traditions, rules and regulations of their community . abhorrent as honour killings are, they are not a crime against humanity. First, they are not committed as part of a State or organizational policy (although some might argue that they are tolerated). Murders in this context are usually based on the perception that the honour of a family/community/clan has been brought into disrepute by the acts of a woman. Killing, somehow, is supposed to restore it. Second, it is difficult to place honour killings within the context of a much larger attack. That is, they are sporadic and individual criminal acts, even if they are numerous in number. They lack the necessary links to one another to be considered part of a widespread or systematic attack. The people involved in these crimes would not perceive themselves to be acting in the furtherance of such an attack. This is not to diminish their brutality or inhumanity, they are heinous criminal acts. But they are clearly not a crime against humanity. In the above case the crime created because their daughter was becoming too westernized which was against the rules and regulations of their community . Another reason was that she married a man of her choice who belong to some other community .The family members got annoyed when she married a man of her choice as this was the first time such kind of marriage had taken place in their family and family members though that it had brought shame to their family and was a great insult for them .

- 11 -

PRAYER In the lights of the facts stated , arguments advanced and authorities cited the appellant i.e. Mr. Shankar humbly pray before the honourable court to be graciously pleased to 1. The appellant should be held guilty under the crime of culpable homicide not amounting to murder rather murder. 2. Honor Killing should be treated separately under IPC or it should have a separate legislation to look after it.

3. These kinds of heinous crimes cannot be considered as crime against humanity as they have been done to safeguard the interests of their own community. These crimes have been committed as they have felt that the plaintiff has disregarded the customs and tradition.

ii

- 12 -