MOOT COURT PROBLEM NO.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESOPONDENT

1. ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether the Learned Sessions Court correctly convicted the accused persons for offences
punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
2. Whether the accused persons acted with common intention and common object?
3. Whether intention clearly attract Section 103(1) of BNS?
4. Whether the plea of right of private defence is available to the accused persons?
5. Whether the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt?

2. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt by presenting the medical and oral
evidences such as forensic report, postmortem report, statement given by witnesses, and
doctor who performed the postmortem that the accused persons formed an unlawful
assembly and committed a brutal assault resulting in the death of Chaturbhai
2. The nature of weapon i.e. sticks and knife used for attacking deceased person and his,
repeated blows on deceased though he fell down and tried escape, and location of injuries
clearly establish intention and knowledge sufficient to attract Section 103(1) BNS.
3. The plea of right of private defence is false, concocted, and legally untenable considering
the firing was done by deceased only in the air without intention to harm anyone, aggression
of accused persons, and attach on deceased person and his son though he fell down and
tried to escape to save themselves.
4. The evidence of eye-witnesses, injured witnesses, medical experts, and forensic reports
fully corroborate each other.

3. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE I: PROSECUTION HAS ESTABLISHED GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE

DOUBT

It is a settled principle of criminal law that the prosecution must prove its case beyond
reasonable doubt, but not beyond all possible doubt. In the present case, the prosecution has
discharged this burden through consistent ocular, medical and forensic evidence.

The prosecution stated that in the present case, all the accused persons (Accused Nos.1–5) came
together to the farm of the deceased, armed with sticks, sickle and knife, and started quarrelling
with him. At the peak of the quarrel, the deceased was kicked and punched, due to which he
fell down. Even after the deceased attempted to escape, the all accused persons chased him,
assaulted him again with sticks, and inflicted repeated blows while uttering threatening words.
Thus, Accused Nos. 1-5 formed an unlawful assembly and committed a brutal assault which
caused death of Chaturbhai.

Further, as per the Postmortem report of the body of the deceased person submitted by the
prosecution, the deceased has sustained multiple fractures in the right leg, injury on forehead
by hard blunt substance and fracture in the back side of the skull. The doctor who performed
postmortem of the body of the deceased had stated that the cause of the death might be due to
haemorrhage caused due to above injuries.
In addition to the above, the prosecution further submits that the statements of the witnesses
which are also corroborated by the medical evidence as submitted above.

PW1 Bhagesh, son of the deceased, intervened to save his father, whereupon he was inflicted a
sickle blow on his neck and left elbow, causing grievous injuries. PW2 Dahiben, wife of
deceased persons also saw five persons beating her husband and son. PW3, labourer also saw
five persons quarrelling with the deceased person and his son and started beating them.
However, PW3 could not identify any of the five accused persons as they ran away from the
place.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Naresh, (2011) 4 SCC 324 held that conviction
can safely be based on the testimony of an injured witness, as such a witness would not falsely
implicate an innocent person leaving the real culprit.

In the present case, PW1 Bhagesh is an injured eyewitness. Thus, his testimony is natural,
cogent and consistent. However, His evidence is corroborated by PW2 Dahiben and medical
evidence.

Thus, The Learned Sessions Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence as stated
above, rightly convicted Accused No.1 for life imprisonment and Accused Nos.2–5 for seven
years rigorous imprisonment.

ISSUE II: INTENTION AND KNOWLEDGE CLEARLY ATTRACT SECTION 103(1)

BNS

Intention or knowledge is to be inferred from the totality of circumstances including nature of

weapon, number of blows, part of body targeted and conduct of the accused.

In one of Case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that if a bodily injury is intentionally inflicted
and is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, the offence squarely falls within
murder.

In the present case, the postmortem report of the body of the deceased person submitted by the
prosecution reveals that the deceased has sustained multiple fractures in the right leg, injury on
forehead by hard blunt substance and fracture in the back side of the skull. The doctor who
performed postmortem of the body of the deceased had stated that the cause of the death might
be due to haemorrhage caused due to above injuries.

Further, even after the deceased attempted to escape, the accused persons chased him, assaulted
him again with sticks, and inflicted repeated blows. Thus, repeated blows on vital parts clearly
demonstrate intention and knowledge sufficient for murder.

Hence, Section 103(1) BNS is rightly attracted.

ISSUE III: COMMON INTENTION AND COMMON OBJECT ARE PROVED

Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is analogous to Section 34 IPC. It embodies the
principle of joint liability.
In Krishna Govind Patil v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1963 SC 1413, it was held that
common intention can be formed on the spot and need not be premeditated.

In the present case, all the accused persons (Accused Nos.1–5) came together to the farm of the
deceased, armed with sticks, sickle and knife, and started quarrelling with him. At the peak of
the quarrel, the deceased was kicked and punched, due to which he fell down. Even after the
deceased attempted to escape to save himself, all the accused persons chased him, assaulted
him again with sticks, and inflicted repeated blows while uttering threatening words. Thus,
Accused Nos. 1-5 formed an unlawful assembly with common intention and knowledge and
committed a brutal assault which caused death of Chaturbhai.

Thus, common intention and common object are clearly established.

ISSUE IV: RIGHT OF PRIVATE DEFENCE IS NOT AVAILABLE

The right of private defence is a defensive right, not a license to retaliate or take revenge.

In Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab, (2010) 2 SCC 333, the Supreme Court held that:
• The accused must not be the aggressor;
• The force used must be proportionate;
• The threat must be imminent.

In Bhanwar Singh v. State of M.P., (2008) 16 SCC 657, it was held that chasing and assaulting
the victim negates the plea of private defence.

In the present case:

• All the accused were aggressors;
• Deceased fired in air only as warning; He didn’t have any intention to injure or hurt any.
If he would have any intention to hurt, injure or harm any accused person, then he
wouldn’t have fired in air. He would have fired pointing out at that person not in the air.
• The accused persons continued to assault deceased person and his son even after
deceased fell down and started escaping to save themselves.

Thus, plea of private defence is untenable.

ISSUE V: MEDICAL AND FORENSIC EVIDENCE FULLY CORROBORATE

OCULAR TESTIMONY

In the present case, the postmortem report of the body of the deceased person submitted by the
prosecution reveals that the deceased has sustained multiple fractures in the right leg, injury on
forehead by hard blunt substance and fracture in the back side of the skull. The doctor who
performed postmortem of the body of the deceased had stated that the cause of the death might
be due to haemorrhage caused due to above injuries.

The forensic report confirms that the Blood group of deceased and Blood stains found on the
sticks are matching.

Thus, medical evidences and oral evidences form a complete chain.

ISSUE VI: TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE

 Appellate courts interfere only when findings are perverse or illegal.

In State of Rajasthan v. Sohan Lal, (2004) 5 SCC 573, it was held that a well-reasoned
judgment should not be disturbed merely because another view is possible.

Further, the Trial has given its judgement post taking into consideration the medical and oral
evidences as submitted to it. Thus, The Trial Court’s judgment is reasoned, evidence-based and
legally sound.

4. PRAYER

In view of the facts, circumstances, and submissions made hereinabove, it is most respectfully
prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
1. Dismiss the present appeal;
2. Affirm the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Sessions
Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad;
3. Pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of
justice.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE RESPONDENT AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL
EVER PRAY.
 MOOT COURT PROBLEM NO. 2

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED

1. ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether the present dispute is purely civil in nature and has been wrongly given a criminal
colour?
2. Whether the essential ingredients of cheating and criminal breach of trust under the BNS
are made out?
3. Whether the Appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS?
4. Whether FIR filed by Shri Deepakkumar is valid?

2. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. The present FIR arises out of a purely commercial transaction and is civil in nature. There
is a commercial disagreement concerning quality of goods supplied and payment thereof.
Such disputes are quintessentially civil in character and are governed by the law of contracts
and sale of goods.
2. No ingredients of cheating or criminal breach of trust under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 are made out as there is no dishonest intention of appellant since inception of
transaction.
3. The FIR was lodged only after the Appellant insisted on return of defective goods, clearly
indicating mala fide intention. The FIR has been filed to harass and pressurize the
Appellant. Such misuse of criminal law to settle scores is impermissible.
4. Arrest of the Appellant would amount to abuse of process of law and in violation of right
of personal liberty granted every citizen as per Article 21 of Constitution of India.
5. The Appellant fulfills all parameters for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 BNSS.

3. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

The Appellant respectfully submits the following comprehensive and elaborated arguments,
supported by statutory interpretation and binding judicial precedents:

ISSUE I: THE ENTIRE DISPUTE IS PURELY CIVIL AND CONTRACTUAL IN

NATURE

It is humbly submitted that the genesis of the present FIR lies in a commercial disagreement
concerning quality of goods supplied and payment thereof. Such disputes are quintessentially
civil in character and are governed by the law of contracts and sale of goods.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held that criminal law should not be permitted to
be used as a weapon for enforcing civil liabilities. In Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India
Ltd., (2006) 6 SCC 736, the Court categorically observed that converting a civil dispute into a
criminal case amounts to abuse of process of law.

Further, where the predominant nature of the dispute is civil, continuation of criminal
proceedings is unjustified.

In the present case, the Appellant never denied the transaction. The appellant is ready and
willing to purchase the goods of agreed quality even today and intends to pay for the same as
well. The appellant was compelled to reject the goods being of inferior quality. His only
grievance pertained to inferior quality of goods. Non-payment under such circumstances is a
recognized commercial defence and cannot, by any stretch of imagination, attract criminal
culpability. Further, in order to establish the offence of either cheating or Criminal Breach of
Trust or of any criminal nature of offence, there has to be dishonest intention, which is lacking
in the present case. Thus, the entire dispute is purely civil and contractual in nature and does
not attract any Criminal liability.

ISSUE II: ABSENCE OF MENS REA – NO OFFENCE OF CHEATING IS MADE OUT

Legal Requirement
In cheating, there is misrepresentation of facts knowing its falsehood and the victim acts upon
such misrepresentation by believing the same to be true. Thus, cheating under the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 requires dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction. Subsequent
failure to pay or perform does not constitute cheating unless initial intention was fraudulent.

Judicial Position

In Hridaya Ranjan Prasad Verma v. State of Bihar, (2000) 4 SCC 168, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held that mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating unless fraudulent intention
exists from the beginning.

Application to Present Case

There is no allegation or material to suggest that the Appellant had dishonest intention when he
placed the order. The refusal to pay arose only after detection of defects. Hence, the offence of
cheating is not attracted.

ISSUE III: INGREDIENTS OF CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST ARE

CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT

Legal requirement
Criminal breach of trust postulates entrustment of property and dishonest misappropriation
thereof. The present transaction was a sale and not a trust or fiduciary arrangement. The failure
to pay without dishonest intention does not constitute criminal breach of trust.

Further, the disputes arising out of contractual obligations do not constitute criminal breach of
trust.

Judicial Position
In Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Limited (2006) 6 SCC 736, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held that the mere breach of contract without dishonest intention, cannot be stretched into
a Criminal Offence.

Application to Present Case

Thus, invocation of criminal breach of trust considering the obligation contractual in nature and
no dishonest intention without intention as he refusal to pay arose only after detection of
defects, the provisions of criminal breach of trust are wholly misconceived and legally
unsustainable.

ISSUE IV: FIR IS MALICIOUS, VEXATIOUS

 The FIR was lodged only after the Appellant insisted on return of defective goods, clearly
indicating mala fide intention. Such misuse of criminal law to settle scores is impermissible.

In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
enumerated categories where criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed, including
proceedings initiated with mala fide intention.

The present case squarely falls within the said parameters.

Further, the allegations leveled in FIR are vague and concocted which can be verified by
looking to the offences mentioned in FIR i.e. of Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust
punishable u/s. 316 and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is humbly submitted that
both the above offences cannot stand together as in cheating there is misrepresentation of facts
knowing its falsehood and the victim acts upon such misrepresentation by believing the same
to be true; whereas in criminal breach of trust, there is an entrustment of property for specific
purpose out of fiduciary relationship.

Hence from the base the FIR cannot sustain, and it has been filed with mala fide intention to
harass and pressurize the appellant.

ISSUE V: APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO ANTICIPATORY BAIL UNDER SECTION

482 BNSS

Object of Anticipatory Bail

Section 482 BNSS is a protective provision intended to safeguard individuals from arbitrary
arrest and humiliation and ensuring that the right of personal liberty of any person under Article
21 of the Constitution of India shouldn’t be violated.

In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565, the Constitution Bench
emphasized that anticipatory bail is an important facet of personal liberty under Article 21.

Factors Favouring the Appellant

• The Appellant is a senior citizen
• The Appellant is having his business since last 25 years. He is having very good
reputation in the market.
• The Appellant is a law abiding citizen and is not having any criminal antecedents.

The Appellant will further ensure the following if the application of granting Anticipatory Bail
is acceded by the Hon’ble Court:
• The Appellant will co-operate with the investigating officers in the event of granting
him anticipatory bail by this Hon’ble Court.
• The applicant submits that he will not jump out the bail in the event of granting him
anticipatory bail.
• The applicant submits that he will not jump out the bail in the event of granting him
anticipatory bail.

4. PRAYER
In view of the facts and circumstances stated hereinabove, it is most respectfully prayed that
this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
• Allow the present application and grant anticipatory bail to the Appellant;
• Direct that the Appellant shall not be arrested in connection with the impugned FIR;
• Pass any other order deemed fit in the interest of justice.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE APPELLANT AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL
EVER PRAY.
 MOOT COURT PROBLEM NO. 3

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED

1. ISSUES RAISED

1. Whether the present Public Interest Litigation is maintainable?

2. Whether unorganised construction activities violate Article 21 of the Constitution of India?
3. Whether unorganised construction activities violate Article 14 & 19(d) of the Constitution
of India?
4. Whether the Respondent Corporation has failed in its statutory and constitutional duties?
5. Whether this Hon’ble Court can issue directions to regulate construction activities?

2. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. The Public Interest Litigation has been filed for requesting the Hon’ble High Court to issue
writ, order or direction for restraining the respondent to continue such unorganized
construction and frame proper policy, planning and procedures to manage the construction
work so that least inconvenience caused to the residents of Ahmedabad and the fundamental
rights of residents are also protected. Here, there is no personal or private interest of the
appellant. Thus, it is fully maintainable in law and facts.
2. Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
Judicial interpretation has consistently expanded the scope of this Article to include the
right to live with human dignity, right to health, right to clean air and pollution-free
environment.
3. Arbitrary and unplanned construction violates Articles 14, 19(1)(d) and 21.
4. The Respondent has failed to follow environmental norms, principles of sustainable
development and public trust doctrine. It has not framed proper policy, planning and
procedures to manage the construction work so that least inconvenience caused to the
residents of Ahmedabad and the fundamental rights of residents are also protected.
5. The courts must intervene where executive actions pose a threat to environmental and
public health. Judicial intervention is necessary to balance development with citizens’
rights.

3. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE I: WHETHER THE PRESENT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IS

MAINTAINABLE?

It is most respectfully submitted that the present Public Interest Litigation is fully maintainable
both in law and on facts. The Petitioner is a public-spirited individual, a social worker and
political leader, who has approached this Hon’ble Court not for any personal or private interest
but for vindication of the fundamental rights of lakhs of citizens of Ahmedabad City.

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984 3 SCC 161), the Supreme Court expanded
the scope of PIL and held that procedural technicalities cannot stand in the way of enforcement
of fundamental rights of the poor, deprived and vulnerable sections of society.

In the present case, unorganised construction activities have resulted in serious violations of the
right to life, health, clean environment and safe movement of the general public. The Public
Interest Litigation has been filed for requesting the Hon’ble High Court to issue writ, order or
direction for restraining the respondent to continue such unorganized construction and frame
proper policy, planning and procedures to manage the construction work so that least
inconvenience caused to the residents of Ahmedabad and the fundamental rights of residents
are also protected. Here, there is no personal or private interest of the appellant. Therefore, the
objection raised by the Respondent regarding maintainability of Public Interest Litigation is
misconceived and liable to be rejected.

ISSUE II: WHETHER UNORGANISED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES VIOLATE

ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA?

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Judicial
interpretation has consistently expanded the scope of this Article to include the right to live with
human dignity, right to health, right to clean air and pollution-free environment.

In the landmark judgment of MC Mehta v. Union of India (1987 1 SCC 395), the Hon’ble
Supreme Court held that the right to live in a pollution-free environment is a part of the
fundamental right under Article 21. The Court further emphasized that environmental
protection is not a luxury but a necessity for human survival.

The Respondent Corporation’s failure to regulate construction activities has resulted in

excessive dust pollution, noise pollution, traffic congestion and fatal accidents. Continuous
exposure to dust and pollutants has led to respiratory diseases such as asthma, tuberculosis and
other serious ailments, thereby directly infringing Article 21.

ISSUE III: WHETHER THE RESPONDENT HAS FAILED IN ITS STATUTORY AND
CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES?

Municipal Corporations are statutory bodies entrusted with the duty to provide basic civic
amenities, ensure public safety, maintain roads and protect public health. The Respondent
Corporation, instead of discharging these duties responsibly, has permitted uncoordinated and
arbitrary construction work causing chaos in the city.

In Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand (1980 4 SCC 162), the Supreme Court held that
statutory authorities cannot escape their obligations by pleading administrative difficulties or
financial constraints. Public health and safety are paramount and non-negotiable.

The Respondent has not framed proper policy, planning and procedures to manage the
construction work so that least inconvenience caused to the residents of Ahmedabad and the
fundamental rights of residents are also protected. The Respondent’s inaction in coordinating
contractors, providing prior public notice, ensuring traffic management and enforcing
environmental safeguards amounts to gross dereliction of duty entrusted to it and violates
constitutional mandates.

ISSUE IV: WHETHER SUCH ACTIONS VIOLATE ARTICLES 14 AND 19(1)(d) OF

THE CONSTITUTION?

Article 14 guarantees equality before law and protection against arbitrary state action.
Unplanned construction without any rational policy or coordination is manifestly arbitrary and
unreasonable.
 Furthermore, Article 19(1)(d) guarantees freedom of movement throughout the territory of
India. Sudden road closures, prolonged diversions and lack of traffic planning severely restrict
the citizens’ right to move freely.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978 1 SCC 248), the Supreme Court held that any
restriction on fundamental rights must be just, fair and reasonable. The Respondent’s actions to
do unorganized construction without framing proper policy, procedures and planning restricts
the fundamental rights of the residents of Ahmedabad. Thus, Respondents actions fail this
constitutional test.

ISSUE V: DOCTRINE OF PUBLIC TRUST, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

The Doctrine of Public Trust casts a duty upon the State and its instrumentalities to protect
natural resources for the enjoyment of the general public. In MC Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997 1
SCC 388), the Supreme Court held that the State is a trustee of all natural resources and cannot
abdicate this responsibility.

Indiscriminate cutting of trees, environmental degradation and rising AQI levels demonstrate
clear violation of this doctrine.

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996 5 SCC 647), the Supreme Court
recognized the principles of Sustainable Development and Precautionary Principle as part of
Indian law. Developmental activities must not compromise environmental protection or public
health.

The Respondent has cut down many standing trees besides the roads while resurfacing the
roads. The Respondent’s approach prioritizes hurried development over sustainability, thereby
violating settled environmental jurisprudence.

ISSUE VI: POWERS OF THIS HON’BLE COURT UNDER ARTICLE 226

This Hon’ble Court is vested with wide and plenary powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution to issue writs, orders and directions for enforcement of fundamental rights and for
ensuring good governance.

In one of landmark case, the Supreme Court held that courts must intervene where executive
actions pose a threat to environmental and public health. In the present case, the unorganized
construction without proper policy, planning, and procedures, infringes the fundamental right
of residents of Ahmedabad to live in a clean and pollution free environment, right to health and
right to have safe movement.

Therefore, judicial intervention is not only justified but necessary to balance developmental
objectives with constitutional guarantees.

4. PRAYER

In view of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and legal submissions, it is most respectfully
prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Respondent from carrying out
unorganised and uncoordinated construction activities;
 2. Direct the Respondent Corporation to frame and implement a comprehensive, transparent
and time-bound policy for construction and road works;
3. Direct strict compliance with environmental laws, air pollution norms and traffic
management protocols;
4. Appoint an independent monitoring committee, if deemed fit, to supervise construction
activities;
5. Pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity
and good conscience.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER
PRAY.
Interview Techniques:

1. Legal Interviewing is a learned skill. A Lawyer must make the client feel comfortable enough
to reveal very personal information to him. This requires an ability to create an atmosphere of
trust and rapport. It is very important to ask right questions in a proper manner to the client.

2. Preparing for client interview is as important as you prepare for the interview itself. It is
important to have all the documentation of the client interview and questions to be prepared in
advance.

3. It is further very important that the client has confidence and trust in you then only he will be
able to discuss his personal legal problems with you.

4. Pointers for obtaining cooperation of clients during the interview:

o Be friendly, courteous and polite at all times
o Practice the art of conversation
o Do not try to impress the client with big words and stuffy conversations. The client will
be more impressed if you are easy in your conduct.
o Maintain good attitude and confidence

5. Guidelines for conducting client interview:

o Explain that the purpose of conducting client interview is to record information and
facts of the case
o Let the client or witness tell the facts of the case in their own words
o Extract the important information and facts
o Ask specific questions on the basis of given information
o Answer the questions without giving any advice
o Obtain necessary information, documents and evidences from the client

6. Listening well is just as important as questioning well. First by listening to the client or witness,
a good rapport can be established. Everyone client or witness will probably eager to talk about
the problem. Thus, the Active listening will be appreciated. Furthermore, it will also help to
obtain a lot of information about the client.

7. In addition to this controlled listening also plays an important role in the client interview
process. The controlled listening refers knowing to interject a question and to steer the witness
or client when they are going in another direction.

8. Further, At the time of listening, we may also aks some of questions from the client in between
the conversation so as to obtain information about the facts and circumstances of the case.

9. The last step is to document the interview so that it will help to prepare for the case and provide
solution for the problem more effectively.
Report of Visti to City Civil & Sessions Court and Mediation Centre

Date of Visit: January 8, 2026

Court Visited: City Civil & Sessions Court
Place: City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad

As a part of practical training, the students of Sir L.A. Shah Law College undertook an academic visit
to the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad. The purpose of visit was to gain practical exposure to the
functioning, administration and dispute resolution decision making mechanism of City Civil Court.

Objectives of the Visit:

a) To observe court proceedings and case management
b) To study the role of judges in various matters.
c) To understand the procedure of filing of cases at City Civil Court
d) To gain practical insights of functioning of City Civil Court
e) To correlate classroom learning with the real court practice.

The Ahmedabad City Civil Court came to be constituted The Ahmedabad City Courts Act, 1961”, and
the Ahmedabad City Civil Courts were established and made functional with effect from 4th November,
1961. The Ahmedabad City Civil Courts are governed by “The Ahmedabad City Civil Court Rules,
1961”. Shri [Link] presided over The Ahmedabad City Civil Courts as the first Principal City Civil
& Sessions Judge from 4th November, 1961 till 15th December, 1962. The present Principal Judge of
Ahmedabad City Civil Court is Shri Hemang R. Rawal.

The City Civil Court has two functions: 1) Administrative 2) Judicial

The City Civil Court has various cadres of Judicial Officers such as Principal Judge, Additional
Principal Judge, Additional District Judge, Registrar.

During the visit, we attended the several court rooms of City Civil Court. We observed the Court
Proceedings at the court rooms. The cases are taken up at the Civil Court according to the daily cause
list. The Parties were called upon as per their respective hearing date. The presence of parties were
noted. The decision making is done as per procedure as laid down in the laws, Manuals and directions
received from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Hon'ble High Court, Law and Judiciary (Legal) Department
of Government.

There are Special Courts assigned to the Judicial Officers(Addl. Sessions Judges) under this
establishment like the matters under the National Investigating Agency Act, Prevention of Terrorism
Act(POTA), Prevention of Corruption Act, Electricity Act, Terrorist and Disruptive
Activities(Prevention) Act(TADA), Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, Gujarat Land
Grabbing(Prohibition) Act, NDPS Act, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, Mines and Minerals(Development &
Regulation) Act etc.

There are exclusive Courts established for the matters registered under Commercial Courts Act, Atrocity
(Prevention) Act, POCSO Act, Rape Cases, all cases exclusively investigated and/or filed by the Central
Bureau of Investigation and Delhi Special Police Establishment for Metropolitan areas of Ahmedabad
City.

We further observed several records of maintained by various sections of the Court such as Register for
Institution, Separate Registers for the registration of Regular Darkhasts, Regular Civil Appeal,
Miscellaneous Civil Appeal and Motor Accident Claim Petitions, Court Fees Register, Refund of Court
Fees Register, Writ Register, Disposal Register etc maintained by organization, Accounts maintained
by the Accounts department, register of Copying application separately for Civil and Criminal Side,
Daily Fee Book and Daily Fee account registers maintained by Copying Section, and Service Books of
officer/s and employee/s, List of disposed of records maintained by the Record Section.

- Visit to Mediation Centre:

As a part of Academic Visit, we also visited Mediation Centre, Ahmedabad.

Mediation is one of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods contemplated under Section 89 of the
Code of Civil Procedure as amended by the Parliament.

Mediation is a process in which a neutral third party assists the disputing parties to creatively resolve
their dispute without going to trial. Mediation presents a unique opportunity for dispute resolution with
the involvement and participation of all the parties and their advocates.

Objective of the Visit:

a) To understand the practical insights of concept the Mediation
b) To observe the functioning of a court annexed mediation centre
c) To learn the role of mediators in dispute resolution

The students were briefed about the concept of mediation, the role of mediators in resolving the dispute
neutrally and ensuring the dispute resolution amicably without court proceedings.

Overall, the visit to City Civil & Sessions Court and Mediation Centre, Ahmedabad was valuable and
informative learning experience. It helped us to understand practical aspects of functioning of Courts
and Mediation Centre and to enhance our knowledge on the same.