(A UNIT OF KINGSTON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE)

INTERNSHIP REPORT
ACADEMIC YEAR (2022-2025)
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD), KINGSTON
LAW COLLEGE

SUBMITTED BY
NAME: RAJA DAS
UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

1|Page
 (A UNIT OF KINGSTON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE)

INTERNSHIP REPORT
ACADEMIC YEAR (2022-2025)
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD), KINGSTON
LAW COLLEGE

SUBMITTED BY
NAME: RAJA DAS
UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

___________________________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE GUIDE - DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD)

2|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENT

SL. NO. SUBJECT PAGE NO

1. DECLARATTION 4
2. CERTIFICATE 5
3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 6
4. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 7
5. INTRODUCTION 8
6. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 - 13
7. BRIEF ABOUT NGO/LAW FIRM/TRIAL 14 - 18
COURT/HIGH COURT/SUPREME
COURT/INSTITUTION
8. OUTCOME OF YOUR LEARNING AND 19
OBSERVATIONS DURING THE
INTERNSHIP

9. RELEVANT CASES AND LAWS REFERRED 20 -27

AND RESEARCHED DURING THE
INTERNSHIP RELATING TO THE MATTERS
AND CASES
10. INTERNSHIP CERTIFICATES 28 - 30

11. CONCLUSION 31

3|Page
 DECLARATTION

I, RAJA DAS, A STUDENT OF LL.B (3 YEARS), KINGSTON LAW

COLLEGE, BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO- 22/KLC-LL.B/203,
HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS ASSIGNMENT IS MY OWN, IT HAS
NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED FOR EXAMINATION IN
FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE OF LAW
FROM THIS OR ANY OTHER UNIVERSITY BEFORE.

SUBMITTED BY

NAME: RAJA DAS

UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

____________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE STUDENT – RAJA DAS

4|Page
 CERTIFICATE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT RAJA DAS, STUDENT OF KINGSTON

LAW COLLEGE, LL.B (3 YEARS) BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO:
22/KLC-LL.B/203, REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398,
SESSION: 2022-2025, UNIVERSITY ROLL NO:
30322011250085, UNDER WEST BENGAL STATE UNIVERSITY
HAS DONE THIS PROJECT WORK UNDER GUIDANCE OF DR.
SHAMSHER ALI, HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT (HOD)
TOWARDS THE FULFILMENT OF LL.B DEGREE DURING THE
PERIOD OF 2022-2025.

PLACE: KOLKATA
DATE:

_______________________
SUPERVISOR
DR. SHAMSHER ALI,
HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT (HOD)
(KINGSTON LAW COLLEGE)

5|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, RAJA DAS, A STUDENT OF LL.B (3 YEARS), KINGSTON LAW COLLEGE,

BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203, HAS PREPARED THIS
INTERNSHIP REPORT. THE FINAL OUTCOME OF THIS ASSIGNMENT
REQUIRED EXTENSIVE GUIDANCE AND ASSISTANCE WHICH I GOT FROM
MY HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT DR. SAMSHER ALI AND OUR PRINCIPAL
SIR DR. SUMAN GUPTA SHARMA AND FROM OTHER FACULTY MEMBERS
AND I AM EXTREMELY FORTUNATE TO HAVE GOT THIS ALL ALONG WITH
THE COMPLETION OF MY PROJECT WORK. I RESPECT AND THANK ALL MY
TEACHERS FOR GIVING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS PROJECT WORK
AND ALSO BY PROVIDING ALL THE SUPPORT THAT WAS REQUIRED TO
ACCOMPLISH THIS PROJECT.

I, WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK FOR GIVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO

THE INTERNSHIPS. IT WAS A UNIQUE EXPERIENCE INTERNING UNDER
THE GUIDANCE OF ADV. PARIMAL ROY & ADV. KALYAN HALDER. THE
INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITIES I HAD WITH ADV. PARIMAL ROY & ADV.
KALYAN HALDER WERE GREAT LEARNING EXPERIENCE AS WELL
PERSONAL GROWTH AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. I AM ALSO
GRATEFUL TO HAVE MET THE SO MANY WONDERFUL PEOPLE DURING
MY INTERNSHIPS FROM WHOM I GOT TO LEARN.

SINCERELY,
NAME: RAJA DAS
UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025
____________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE STUDENT – RAJA DAS

6|Page
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATION FULL FORM

HON’BLE HONOURABLE

ADV. ADVOCATE

GST GOODS AND SERVICE TAX

OTHS OTHERS

IPC INDIAN PENAL CODE

C.R.P.C. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

7|Page
 INTRODUCTION

During the course of Internships, I was mainly asked to see

the proceedings and read the case files of the cases on that
particular day during the office hours. The Advocates under
whom I was working were Private Practisers and dealt with
the civil, criminal, labour & service matter cases. I was also
briefed about the how is drafting done and how a case comes
on the cause list and departments in the court where drafting
and case registration is done. In the internships I came across
the court mannerisms which is to be strictly followed such as
the wearing of the uniform, maintaining silence during the
case proceedings, etc. Overall, the conversation with the
people was friendly and the advocates and the associates were
friendly and helpful.

8|Page
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 OVERVIEW:

I interned at the High Court in Kolkata, under the Adv. Parimal

Roy [B.A LL.B, Calcutta High Court] & interned at the Kolkata
Bench, Kolkata, under the Adv. Kalyan Halder [[Link], LL.B,
Ex. Vigiilance of Legal & Vigilance in CPSU, GOVT, of India, High
Court Kolkata & CAT, Kolkata Bench]. At the both places timings
of the internships were from about 11 am to 8pm. I was
introduced to the courts and its work procedures on the very
first day. Mainly the work was reading the files and on day-to-
day proceedings of the cases which the lawyer was involved,
taking quick short notes, making notes of important parts of
arguments, collecting the case related documents, collecting
next hearing dates & taking note of them in proper manner for
easy access and then see what is the verdict and if the judgment
is given then read the judgment.

 SUMMARY OF WEEKLY WORK DONE:

 WEEKLY WORK DONE UNDER SUPERVISION OF ADV.

PARIMAL ROY:

During the first week of my internship at the High Court,

Kolkata on the very first day, I went to directly to the office as
in court winter break was going on, so at the office I was given
the case files, which in recent times judgments were given.
Basically, the office hours were only from 09.00 am to 03.00
pm. During this first week, I was oriented with how any case
particular enter into the board and how is drafting done but not
in depth.
9|Page
During the second week of my internship, I was directly called
to the court as breaks were over and I was told to accompany
the associates to the particular courts and wait for our number
to be called. After that I was shown the departments where all
the cases are filled and if the cases had been given the
judgment, then to collect the judgement from the office. After
the court hours, we were told to go to the office, where the
associates prepared for the next day and prepare arguments.
Even the cause list is printed out from the official site of the
Hon’ble High Court.

During the third week, the process went the same with reading
the case files and going to the court and see the proceedings of
the case in the court and after the court hours sometime have
to work at chamber.

During the fourth week, the process remained the same, so the
proceedings of the case Ashish Chandra Vs. New India
Assurance and after the court hours, went to the office and read
the case file. Another thing I did on the fourth week is we saw
Vetting cantonment contract where we were asked to go through
and if any mistake in writing the legal terms, then we had to
correct that mistake.

The total Internship period was of 3+6 months, during the

period the internship the work Schedule sometimes changed
but the work schedule and process was similar throughout the
period.

10 | P a g e
 WEEKLY WORK DONE UNDER SUPERVISION OF ADV.
KALYAN HALDER:

During the first week of my internship at the CAT Kolkata

Bench, Kolkata on the very first day, I went to directly to the
Court as on that a very important case was scheduled for Final
Hearing and probable judgement was to be passed, so at the
Court I was given the case file and short brief about stages and
till day what have been progressed, and a copy of relating to its
recent notification come advise by the UPSC were given to me
to take a look before arguing in the Final Hearing. Basically, the
office hours were only from 10.00 am to 06.00 pm. During this
first week, I was oriented with how any case particulars enter
into the board and how is drafting of service-related matters are
done but not in depth.

During the second week of my internship, I was directly called

to the court as during that period only court hearing listening
was my priority to be taken as per instruction of my senior
advocate and I was told to accompany the associates to the
particulars courts and wait for our number to be called. After
that I was shown the departments where all the cases are filled
and if the cases had been given the judgment, then to collect
the judgement from the office. After the court hours, we were
told to go to the office cum chamber, where the associates
prepared for the next day and prepare arguments. Even the
cause list is printed out from the official site of the CAT Kolkata
Bench, Kolkata. Also introduced me how to file case online

11 | P a g e
 through portal before submitting it physically to the court filling
department.

During the third week, the process went the same with reading
the case files and going to the court and see the proceedings of
the case in the court and after the court hours work in the
chamber as par need of urgency to related cases.

During the fourth week, the process remained the same, so the
proceedings of the case Sanjoy Sen Vs. Central Bureau of
investigation (CBI) and after the court hours, went to the office
and read the case file. Another thing I did on the fourth week is
I saw and learned the CCS & CCA Pension Rules & Act and CAT
Procedural Rules where we were asked to go through and if any
mistake in writing the legal terms in our case briefs, then I had
to correct that mistake.

The total Internship period was of 6 months and then turned

into permanent junior fellowship, during the period the
internship the work Schedule sometimes changed but the work
schedule and process was similar throughout the period.

 DESCRIPTIONS OF LAWS LEARNT/DEALT WITH

1) Constitution of India.
2) Contract Act, 1872
3) Indian Penal Code, 1860
4) CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure), 1973
5) CAT (Procedures) Rules, 1987
6) CCS Pension Rules, 2021
7) CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965

12 | P a g e
  LEARNING OUTCOME:

The major learning outcome during the course of my

internship:

 Improvement and refining analytical and communication

skills.
 Gaining exposure to a breadth of criminal law.
 Engaging in a strong, supportive mentoring relationship
with advocates.
 Gaining a unique perspective of how a court works.
 Learnt the difference between good and bad advocacy from
reading briefs and watching oral arguments.

 ANALYSIS OF FINAL REPORT:

The Final Report further deals in detail about the various cases
read, various laws and my experience during the course of my
internships. With each passing day at the High court an CAT
Kolkata Bench, there were growth in the capacity of my
knowledge. I was given a task to analyse the cases for the day
and present my view points on the same if any.

13 | P a g e
 A BRIEF OF HIGH COURT

The Calcutta High Court is the oldest High Court in India. It

is located at Esplanade Row West, Calcutta (Kolkata), West
Bengal. It has jurisdiction over the state of West Bengal and
the Union Territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The
Court design is somewhat based on the Lakenhal (Cloth-Hall)
in Ypres in Flanders, Belgium.

Currently, the court has a sanctioned judge strength of 72.

 HISTORY

Calcutta High Court in the 1860s Calcutta High Court in the 1890s

The Calcutta High Court is one of the three High Courts in India
established at the Presidency Towns by Letters patent granted
by Queen Victoria, and is the oldest High Court in India. It was
brought into existence as the High Court of Judicature at Fort
William by the Letters Patent dated 14 May 1862, issued under
the High Courts Act, 1861, which was preceded by
the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William. The court
was formally opened on 1 July 1862.

Despite the name of the city having officially changed

from Calcutta to Kolkata in 2001, the Court, as an institution
retained the old name. The bill to rename it as Kolkata High

14 | P a g e
Court was approved by the Union Cabinet on 5 July 2016 along
with the renaming of its two other counterparts
in Chennai and Mumbai. The Bill called High Courts (Alteration
of Names) Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 19 July
2016 and is yet to be passed by both Houses of Parliament.
Hence, the High Court still retains the old name.

 PRINCIPAL SEAT AND BENCHES

The seat of the Calcutta High Court is at Calcutta (Kolkata),
capital of West Bengal. As per the Calcutta High Court
(Extension of Jurisdiction) Act, 1953, the Calcutta High
Court's jurisdiction was extended to cover Chandernagore and
the Andaman and Nicobar Islands as of 2 May 1950. The
Calcutta High Court extended its Circuit Bench in Port Blair,
and in Jalpaiguri, the divisional headquarters of the North
Bengal region. President Ram Nath Kovind finalised the
opening of the other circuit bench in Jalpaiguri, West
Bengal with the jurisdiction area within 5 Districts.

15 | P a g e
 CHIEF JUSTICE
The current Chief Justice of the court is Justice T. S.
Sivagnanam.[7] Sir Barnes Peacock was the first Chief Justice
of the High Court. He assumed the charge when the court was
founded on 1 July 1862. Romesh Chandra Mitra was the first
Indian officiating Chief Justice and Phani Bhushan Chakravartti
was the first Indian permanent Chief Justice of the court. The
longest-serving Chief Justice was Mr. Sankar Prasad Mitra.

16 | P a g e
 A BRIEF OF CENTRAL ADMINITRATIVE
TRIBUNAL
Central Administrative Tribunal is a quasi-judicial
body set up under the Central Administrative Tribunal Act to
resolve the grievances of Central Government employees and
State Government employees of India in a speedy and
effective way.

 HISTORY AND OBJECTIVE

Central Administrative Tribunal was set up under Central
Administrative Tribunal Act in the year 1985 with the
main aim of resolving the grievances of Central and State
Government employees concerning their service matters, as a
speedy and effective remedy. Currently Central
Administrative Tribunal has 19 benches across Indian cities.

 MEMBERS
The Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal should be
from Judicial background. Central Administrative Tribunal
has a bench of 64 members with 32 members each from
judicial and administrative backgrounds. As per the Laws for
the functioning of Central Administrative Tribunal, each

17 | P a g e
 bench should have two members with one member each
from judicial and one administrative background.

 POWERS
Central Administrative Tribunal, in respect of any of its
contempt proceedings, has similar jurisdiction and powers as
that of High Court.

 CHALLENGES
Central Administrative Tribunal regularly faces staff crunch.

18 | P a g e
 OUTCOME OF YOUR LEARNING AND
OBSERVATIONS DURING THE INTERNSHIP

It is said that practical knowledge is far better than the knowledge

one gets from books which was finely proved to me during the
course of my internships. I worked in High Court, Kolkata & CAT,
Kolkata Bench under Adv. Parimal Roy & Adv. Kalyan Halder. High
court are the principal civil courts of original jurisdiction in each
and state and union territory, CAT, is sub legislative court for
speedy disposal of service and labour matters.

The major learning outcome from the internship was-

 Improvement and refining analytical and communication

skills.
 Gaining exposure to a breadth of criminal law.
 Engaging in a strong, supportive mentoring relationship with
advocates.
 Gaining a unique perspective of how a court works.
 Learnt the difference between good and bad advocacy from
reading briefs and watching oral arguments.
After reading several cases, I have learned so many various
things which are very necessary for a law student to know. I
observed that a lawyer must have good and wide range of
contacts and only if he would have contacts then he would be
worth and he would have large number of cases and it would
help him in doing his work at ease. Even the good lawyers with
good contacts are favoured by the judges. It was also observed
that lawyers for their client’s sake do meld the facts and do
speak flawless lies so that their clients are saved.

19 | P a g e
 RELEVANT CASES AND LAWS REFERRED
AND RESEARCHED DURING THE
INTERNSHIP RELATING TO THE
MATTERS AND CASES

CASE- 1. INSPECTOR RAJENDRA SINGH & ORS. V. UOI &

ORS.
The case of Inspector Rajendra Singh & Ors. v. UOI & Ors. (W.P.(C)
2810/2016), decided by the Delhi High Court on March 27, 2017, is a
significant judgment concerning the entitlement of government employees to
the Old Pension Scheme (OPS) versus the New Pension Scheme (NPS) when
there were administrative delays in their appointment process.

 KEY ISSUES AND FACTS:

 PENSION SCHEME DISPUTE: The core issue was whether the petitioners,
who were recruited as Sub-Inspectors in Central Armed Police Forces
(specifically BSF in this case), should be covered by the Old Pension
Scheme (Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972) or the New
Contributory Pension Scheme (introduced with effect from January 1,
2004).

 ADMINISTRATIVE DELAYS: The recruitment process for these

petitioners commenced in 2002-2003 with advertisements and written
examinations. While candidates for other forces (CRPF, CISF, ITBP) from
the same selection process were issued appointment letters and joined
service before December 31, 2003, the petitioners (who opted for BSF)
faced delays, particularly due to being initially declared medically unfit
and then undergoing review medical boards. These delays resulted in their
joining service in January 2004 or later, after the New Pension Scheme
had come into force.

 Discriminatory Treatment: The petitioners argued that it was unjust and

arbitrary to deny them the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme simply
because of administrative delays not attributable to them. They were part

20 | P a g e
 of a common selection process, and differentiation based on the "fortuitous
event" of their joining date (due to administrative lags) was discriminatory.

 COURT'S REASONING AND DECISION:

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, holding that:
 PROTECTION AGAINST ARBITRARY CHANGES: Basic terms and
conditions of service, such as the right to receive a pension upon
superannuation, as applicable at the time of the notification of the posts
and the commencement of the selection process, cannot be altered to the
prejudice of the incumbents due to subsequent administrative delays.

 NO FAULT OF EMPLOYEES: The delays in medical examinations, re-

examinations, and issuance of appointment letters were on the part of the
authorities and not the petitioners. They should not be penalized for
administrative inefficiency.

 PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS: Denying the Old Pension Scheme benefits to

these petitioners, while others from the same recruitment drive (who joined
earlier due to no such delays) received them, was deemed arbitrary and
discriminatory.

 RELIANCE ON PRECEDENTS: The court cited several previous judgments

(e.g., Avinash Singh v. Union of India, Parmanand Yadav v. Union of India)
that had similarly granted Old Pension Scheme benefits in cases of
administrative delays affecting the date of joining.

 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE JUDGMENT:

This judgment is highly significant for government employees and has
been widely cited in similar cases across various courts and tribunals:

 SAFEGUARDS EMPLOYEE RIGHTS: It reinforces the principle that

employees should not suffer a detriment in their service conditions
(especially pension benefits) due to delays caused by the recruiting or
appointing authorities.

 IMPACT ON PENSION SCHEMES: It provides a strong precedent for

individuals who initiated their recruitment process before the cut-off date

21 | P a g e
 for the New Pension Scheme (January 1, 2004) but joined service after it
due to administrative reasons. Such individuals can claim entitlement to
the Old Pension Scheme.

 ENSURES ADMINISTRATIVE FAIRNESS: The ruling emphasizes the

judiciary's role in ensuring administrative fairness and preventing
arbitrary actions by government departments that negatively impact
employees.

 WIDER APPLICATION: The principles laid down in this case have been
applied to numerous other cases involving the Old Pension Scheme vs.
New Pension Scheme, where candidates were subjected to delays beyond
their control.

 CONCLUSION
In essence, the Delhi High Court in Inspector Rajendra Singh & Ors. v.
UOI & Ors. provided crucial relief to government employees who, through
no fault of their own, were placed under a less beneficial pension scheme
due to administrative bottlenecks in their recruitment process.

22 | P a g e
 CASE- 2. K.K. Velusamy vs. N. Palanisamy, (2011) 11 SCC
275.
The case of K.K. Velusamy vs. N. Palanisamy, (2011) 11 SCC 275, is a
landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that primarily deals with
the inherent powers of civil courts under Section 151 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), particularly in relation to reopening
evidence and recalling witnesses. It also touched upon the admissibility
of electronic evidence.

Here's a breakdown of the key aspects, reasoning, and implications:

 Background:
 The case involved a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement. The
appellant (defendant) contended that the agreement was merely a security
for a loan.

 After the evidence was closed and arguments were in progress, the
appellant sought to reopen the evidence and recall witnesses (including
the plaintiff) for further cross-examination. The purpose was to confront
them with electronically recorded conversations (on a compact disc) where
the plaintiff allegedly admitted that the agreement was a loan security.

 The trial court and High Court rejected these applications, primarily on
the ground that the evidence was already concluded and allowing it would
delay the proceedings.

 KEY ISSUES BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT:

 SCOPE OF SECTION 151 CPC: Whether the inherent power of the court
under Section 151 CPC could be invoked to reopen evidence or recall
witnesses, especially after the evidence stage is closed.

 ORDER XVIII RULE 17 CPC: The purpose and scope of Order XVIII Rule
17 CPC (power to recall and examine witnesses).

 ADMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE: Whether electronically

recorded conversations (like those on a CD) are admissible as evidence.

 SUPREME COURT'S REASONING AND DECISION:

23 | P a g e
1. INHERENT POWERS UNDER SECTION 151 CPC:
o The Supreme Court clarified that the inherent powers under Section
151 CPC are indeed wide and can be exercised by the court to "make
such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent
abuse of the process of the court."

o It held that while the CPC contains specific provisions for various
procedural aspects, it does not exhaust all situations. Where there is
no express provision, Section 151 CPC fills the gap.

o Crucially, the Court stated that the deletion of Order XVIII Rule 17A
(which explicitly allowed parties to produce additional evidence under
certain conditions) does not mean that no evidence can be received
after a party closes their evidence. It simply means that the
legislature envisioned a quicker trial process where such a provision
was not routinely needed.

o However, if there is a time gap between the completion of evidence

and the hearing of arguments, and a party genuinely comes across
new evidence (which could not have been discovered earlier with due
diligence) or evidence regarding the conduct of the other party that
comes into existence later, the court can exercise its discretion under
Section 151 CPC to reopen evidence or recall witnesses.

o The exercise of this power must be bona fide and the additional
evidence must genuinely assist the court in clarifying issues and
rendering justice. It should not be used as a "protracting tactic" or to
"fill up lacunae" in the evidence already led.

2. ORDER XVIII RULE 17 CPC:

o The Court distinguished the power under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC
from Section 151. Order XVIII Rule 17 primarily allows the court to
recall a witness to clarify any doubts the court itself may have
regarding the evidence already given. It is not intended to allow parties
to routinely re-examine witnesses or to introduce new evidence to fill
gaps.
24 | P a g e
 3. ADMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE:

o The Court affirmed that electronically recorded conversations (like

those on a CD) are admissible as evidence. It referred to the definition
of "evidence" under Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, read
with the definition of "electronic record" under Section 2(t) of the
Information Technology Act, 2000.

o It reiterated that such recordings, if relevant and their authenticity and

accuracy can be proved (by eliminating possibilities of tampering, etc.),
are admissible.

 KEY TAKEAWAYS AND IMPLICATIONS:

 Broad Scope of Section 151 CPC: This case solidified the inherent powers
of civil courts to pass orders necessary for justice, even if there isn't a
specific provision in the CPC. It allows for flexibility in procedural matters
to achieve substantive justice.

 Conditions for Reopening Evidence/Recalling Witnesses: The

judgment laid down important conditions for exercising this power:

o There must be a valid and sufficient reason for the non-production

of evidence earlier.

o The application must be bona fide and not a dilatory tactic.

o The new evidence, whether oral or documentary, must be material and

genuinely assist the court in clarifying issues or rendering justice.

o It's not for filling lacunae or omissions in already presented evidence.

o The court can impose appropriate costs to compensate the other party
for any delay.

 Admissibility of Digital Evidence: The ruling explicitly endorsed the

admissibility of electronically recorded conversations, provided their
authenticity and relevance are established. This was crucial for adapting
legal procedures to technological advancements.

25 | P a g e
 BALANCING JUSTICE AND PROCEDURE: The judgment attempts to
strike a balance between adhering to procedural rules (to ensure
expeditious disposal of cases) and ensuring that substantive justice is
done by allowing for the introduction of crucial evidence in exceptional
circumstances.

 DISCRETIONARY POWER: The power under Section 151 CPC is

discretionary. Courts are expected to exercise it sparingly and with
caution, considering the facts and circumstances of each case.

 CONCLUSION
In summary, K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy is a pivotal case that
guides civil courts on the appropriate use of their inherent powers to
reopen evidence or recall witnesses, especially when new and relevant
evidence emerges post the initial evidence stage, ensuring that procedural
strictures do not obstruct the path to justice.

CASE- 3. Polabhai Khimshibhai Ulava vs. State of Gujarat

 FACTS OF THE CASE

that the complainant Polabhai filed a complaint that 3 persons
including Complainant himself, his brother in law and his cousin went
to the Ramdev hotel for lunch. They went to the ‘Pan parlor’ to have
pan masala and there they had an angry conversation with the owner
for paying the money. Then after complainant leaved the place and as
they reached to the Chathiyarada village respondent along which other
10-12 people attacked them with sticks and knife. So they filled in the
High Court.

 THE JUDGMENT IS STILL IN RESERVE.

26 | P a g e
 CASE- 4. Harilal Hirjibhai Vaselia vs. MSR. Gajanand
transport
 FACTS OF THE CASE:
The applicants had filled before the learned Motor Accident Claim
Tribunal(Auxiliary), claiming for the compensation Rs 10,00,000/- and
the Learned Tribunal was pleased to grant only Rs. 7,61,250 /- so
with this the applicants where not satisfied with the Learned Tribunal
decision so they filled in High court. The civil application for
condonation of delay in preferring the First Appeal. The reason stated
by the applicants about the delay was that they were not knowing
about the civil application and due to poor background led them to file
this first appeal after much time.

 THE CASE IS GOING ON. JUDGMENT IS YET TO COME.

CASE- 5. JAYANTILAL SURAJI THAKUR VS STATE OF GUJARAT

 THE FACTS OF THE CASE

that the appellant was kidnapped along with others and all were taken
to UP when they all returned, everyone accused as kidnapper a man
murdered and thus allegations on the appellant. The appellant had
applied for bail in the Gujarat High Court.

 THE JUDGMENT IS YET TO COME.

27 | P a g e
INTERNSHIP CERTIFICATES

28 | P a g e
29 | P a g e
30 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION
The internships provided me with great exposure knowledge,
network and helped me meld myself professionally and
personally. It has helped me stay calm and positive and has as
well added a new experience in my life. It specifically has taught
me the importance of knowing your basics right. I have learnt
and gained in:

 Improvement and refining analytical and communication

skills.
 Gaining exposure to a breadth of criminal law.
 Engaging in a strong, supportive mentoring relationship with
advocates.
 Gaining a unique perspective of how a court works.
 Learnt the difference between good and bad advocacy from
reading briefs and watching oral arguments.

31 | P a g e