Memo

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 119
  • Published : February 11, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
BEFORE THE HON’BLE
SUPREME COURT OF PUNYABHUMI

Under Article 136 of the
Constitution of Punyabhumi

anna godbole and anr .....................................................................Appellant

v.
state of punya bhumi ..............................…………………………Respondent

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE respondEnt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
STATEMENT OF FACTS
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
PRAYER
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

cases Referred:
Gian kaur v. State of punjab
Books Referred:
1. M. P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 5th Edition, Reprint 2008, Wadhwa and Company Nagpur. 2. K.D Gaur , The Indian penal Code, 4th Edition, 2008, , Universal Law Publishing Company Ltd. 3. S.P Sathe Judicial Activism in India, 2nd Edition, 2008, Oxford India Paperbacks. .

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The present Writ Appeal is filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India and the same has already been admitted by this court. The Issues to be argued before this Hon’ble Court are also framed by the Court itself and there is no dispute regarding the Jurisdiction.

Article 136:
(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Chapter, the Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India. (2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to any judgment, determination, sentence or order passed or made by any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Anna Godbole and Anr ., (hereinafter referred as Respondent) , the leader of Punyabhumi for Transparency went on a hunger strike from the 2nd of October , 2010 in the capital state of Rajdhani and threatened that the hunger strike would continue till his demands were met by the Union Government 2. On 17th October 2010 , 15 days after the agitation started the health of Anna Godbole was detoriating taking cognizance of which the State Government warned the members of Punyabhumi for transparency to end the agitation in the best interest of Anna Godbole 3. On 19th of October after the condition of Anna Godbole became very critical following which the State government to commit suicide and shifted him to a hospital . A criminal case of attempt to commit suicide was registered against him under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code 4. Anna Godbole was charged by the trial court for Attempt to commit suicide . He filed a Special leave petition under Article 136 of the constitution challenging the validity of Section 309 of the Penal code as violative of his fundamental right to equality and life and personal liberty . A petition was filed in the Supreme Court under Article 32 by Punyabhumi for Transparency for forcibly stopping the peaceful agitation and and violating the various fundamental rights under article 19 and 21. 50 crore rupees as damages were claimed and by the respondents and a direction by the court to take legal action against Union and home ministers and certain police officers . 5. The Supreme court combined the appeal of Mr Anna Godbole and the petition by Punyabhumi for transparency.The court constituted a larger bench of 7 judges

-------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT OF ISSUES

* Whether Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code is violative of fundamental right to equality , life and personal liberty .

* Whether the writ petition filed by Punyabhumi for transparency under aricle 32 of the constitution is maintainable Whether stopping of a peaceful agitation is violative of their fundamental right under article 19 and 21 of the...
tracking img