Memorial Submission [Teammoo Code 61]

8/12/2019 Memorial Submission [Teammoo Code 61]

1/36

RGNUL INTRA MOOT COMPETITION - 2013

INTHEHONBLEHIGHCOURT

W.P. NO: /2013

[UNDERART. 226 OFTHECONSTITUTIONOFINDIA, 1!0"

#T$RIONBHUSHAN% V. #CENTRALBUREAUOF

IN&ESTIGATION%

-PETITIONER- -RESPONDENT-

MEMORIALDRAWNANDSUBMITTEDONBEHALFOFTHEPETITIONER

#T$RIONBHUSHAN%

TEA' ( 61


2/36

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION............................................................................................. IX

STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................................................................ X

ISSUES RAISED .........................................................................................................................

XII

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

BODY OF ARGUMENTS ............................................................................................................. 1

CONTENTION 1 .......................................................................................................................... 1

WHETHER SECTION 6A WAS APPLICABLE TO 'R. BHUSHAN INCLUDING WHETHER 'R. BHUSHAN,AN IAS OFFICER OF THE PUN)AB CADRE, WAS AN E'PLO$EE OF THE CENTRAL GO&ERN'ET*

........................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1. THE PETITIONER WAS AN EMPPLOYEE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ..................................1

1.2. SECTION A OF THE DSPE ACT! 1"# IS APPLICABLE TO THE PETITIONER

CONTENTION II ......................................................................................................................... 1

WHETHER 'R. BHUSHANS ARREST COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN #ARREST ON THE SPOT%*

..

ii


3/36

2.1.THE ARREST OF THE PETITIONER CANNOT BE CLASSIFIED AS $ARREST ON THE SPOT% UNDER

THEPURVIEW OF MEANING ESTABLISHED BY THE HON&BLE COURTS..

2.2. THE ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 13'1(')( OF THE PREVENTION OF

CORRUPTION ACT! 1"**........................................... 2

CONTENTION III........................................................................................................................ 1

WHETHER THE TELEPHONE TAP ON MR. BHUSHAN WAS VALID! AND WHETHER THE SAME WAS

VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY+................................................................. 1

3.1. NON COMPLIANCE OF CENTRAL ELEMENTS OF SECTION ,'2( OF THE INDIAN TELEGRAPH ACT! 1**,RENDERED PHONE TAP INVALID.

3.2. ARBITRARINESS IN THE EXERCISE OF POWER DUE TO NON COMPLIANCE OF PROCEDUREESTABLISHED UNDER #1"-A OF THE INDIAN TELEGRAPH RULES! 1",1.

3.3. INVALID TELEPHONE TAP ON PETITIONER WAS IN VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTTO PRIVACY

3.3.1$RIGHT TO PRIVACY% IS IMPLICIT IN $RIGHT TO LIFE%..

3.3.2 TELEPHONE TAPPING INFRINGED ARTICLE 21DUE TO NON COMPLIANCE OF PROCEDURE

ESTABLISHED BY LAW UNDER SECTION ,'2( OF THE INDIAN TELEGRAPH ACT AND #1"-A UNDER THE

INDIAN TELEGRAPH RULES! 1",1

PRAYER FOR RELIEF ............................................................................................................... XI

iii


4/36

iv


5/36

INDE+ OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES REFERRED

1. THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA! 1",0

2. THE INDIANTELEGRAPHACT! 1**,

3. THE INDIANTELEGRAPHRULES! 1",1

#. THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT!1"**

,. THEDELHISTATEPOLICEESTABLISHMENTACT! 1"#

. THEINDIANEVIDENCEACT! 1*2

. THEALLINDIASERVICEACT! 1",1

*. THE FUNDAMENTALRULES! THEALLINDIASERVICEACT! 1",1

". INDIANADMINISTRATIVESERVICE'CADRE( RULES! 1",#

BOOS REFERRED

1.MAJUMADAR! P.. SERVICE LAWSININDIA! ORIENT PUBLISHING COMPANY '200(

2. /AIDI! HASAN. MOBILEPHONEFORENSICSANDELECTRONICSURVEILLANCE!

ALLAHABAD LAW AGENCY '2010(

3. JAIN! M.P. INDIANCONSTITUTIONALLAW 'VOL. 1(! LEXISNEXIS2010

#. BASU! DD. INTRODUCTIONTOTHECONSTITUTIONOFINDIA! LEXISNEXIS200"

,. DE! D.J. NEWDIMENSIONSOFCONSTITUTIONALLAW

. MATHUR! A.P. COMMENTARIES ONTHEPREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT! EASTERN CO.

v


6/36

BOOS '1"3( III

. AG/I!M.G. THEINDIANADMINISTRATIVELAW! METROPOLITANBOOS'1""(

CASESREFERRED

1. UNIONOFINDIA ORS. V RAJIVYADAVIAS ANDORSAIR 1""# SC ,#

2. R.R. ISHOREVCBI AIR 200 DELHC 1,1

3. SHAILENDRANATH BOSE V STATEOFBIHARAIR 1"* SC 3

#. A.S. ANNANVSTATEBYINSPECTORAIR 2011 MADHC *

,. STATEOFERALA ANR. VC.P. RIOAIR 2011 SC *

. RANJIBHAIAVABHAIPATELVSTATEOFGUJARATAIR 2011 SC 1,*2

. SMT. MEENAWOBALWANTHEMEVSTATEOFMAHARASHTRA

*. PUCL VUNIONOFINDIAAIR 1"" SC ,*

". HUUMCHANDSHYAMLALVUNIONOFINDIAAIR 1" SC *"

10. STATENCT OFDELHIVNAVJOTSANDHU200,'11( SCC 00

11. .L.D. NAGASREEVGOVTOFINDIAAIR 200 AP 102

12. HARASINGHVSTATEOFUP AIR 1"3 SC 12",

13. UNNIRISHNANVSTATEOFANDHRAPRADESHAIR 1""3 SC 21*

1#. R. RAJGOPALAVSTATEOFTAMILNADUAIR 1"", SC 2#

1,. M.NAGARAJAVUNIONOFINDIAAIR 200 SC 1

1. MANEAGANDHUVUNIONOFINDIAAIR 1"* SC ,"

'ISCELLANEOUS DOCU'ENTS

1. DEPARTMENTOFPERSONNEL TRAININGORDERNO. 130121"*-ESTT. 'D( DATED20.0#.1""* ISSUEDBYTHEMINISTRYOFPERSONNEL! PUBLICGRIEVANCESANDPENSIONS.

vi


7/36

LIST OF ABBRE&IATIONS

1. A)

2. AIR...A I)45 R6789:69

3. A9A8:;69

#. A9:...A9:4 I?6@:45:48

. E)...E)4:48

. G8?:G8?696:

*. H8&6..H88956

". HC....H4; C8=9:

10. IAS.I)45 A)44@:95:4?6 S69?4


8/36

1. UID..U4=6 I)6:4>4 I)45

1". ?...V69@=@

20. V8.V8=6

viii


9/36

STATE'ENT OF )URISDICTION

B6>896 :;6 H8&6 H4; C8=9: 8> P=5 5) H5955! :;4@ 76:4:48 4@ >46) >89 :;6 =5@;4 8> :;6

798896 :;6 L). S7. J=)6! =)69 A9:4 :;6 I)45

C8@:4:=:48 9 @6 C9.PC! =)69 :;6 94: 8> 5:=96 8> P98;44:48! 554@: :;6 465

4?6@:45:48 ?485:4 :;6 @:5:=:89 798?4@48@.

9


10/36

STATE'ENT OF FACTS

1. T948 B;=@;5! 5 I)45 A)44@:95:4?6 S69?4>4 :;6 1"*, 5: :;6

P=5 :;6 >49@: 5 D65) D95>: 4 :;6 56 8>

;4@ 4>6&@ C875 M@ F966;8) :;6965>:69.

,. D4@:95=;: 5: :;6 )65)@ 8> T948! V665 57798598 @>4


11/36

4:45:48 V665 L54@:69! 4: 5@ )6


12/36

10. T948 B;=@;5 5@ 5996@:6) 46)45:6 :;6 CBI 8>>4 :;6 @54) )5@ 8> P84 " )5@ 8> ;4@ 5996@:. A@ 769 :;6 C;596 @;66:!

:;6 CBI @:5:6) :;5: M9. B;=@;5 5@ =4: 8> 8>>6


13/36

ISSUES RAISED

THEFOLLOWING ISSUES HA&EBEENRAISEDFORAD)UDICATIONBEFORETHEHONBLEHIGH

COURT-

1. WHETHERSECTION6A WASAPPLICABLETO'R. BHUSHANINCLUDINGWHETHER'R.

BHUSHAN, AN IAS OFFICER OF THE PUN)AB CADRE, WAS AN E'PLO$EE OF THE

CENTRALGO&ERN'ENT*

2. WHETHER 'R. BHUSHANS ARREST COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS AN #ARREST ON THE

SPOT%*

3. WHETHER THE TELEPHONE TAP ON 'R. BHUSHAN WAS &ALID, AND WHETHER THE

SA'EWASIN&IOLATIONOFHISCONSTITUTIONALRIGHTTOPRI&AC$*

13


14/36

14


15/36

SU''AR$ OF ARGU'ENTS

1. WHETHER SECTION 6A WAS APPLICABLE TO 'R. BHUSHAN INCLUDING WHETHER

'R. BHUSHAN, ANIAS OFFICEROFTHEPUN)ABCADRE, WASANE'PLO$EEOFTHE

CENTRALGO&ERN'ENT*

A@ 798?4)6) A9:4 :;6

C6:95 G8?696:.

A@ 769 :;6 96=496:@ 8> S6 C899=7:48 A


16/36


17/36

;5@ 6@:54@;6) 5 798886) 6>896 54 7;86 :57. I K.L.D Nagasree v

ov! of India! 4: 5@ ;6) :;5: :;6 798?4@48@ 6?4@56) 4 #1" A 596 5)5:89 :8 >88. I

:;6 4@:5: T;6 I)45 T66957; A95=)56:5 94;: 4.6. R4;: :8 P94?5 :;6

76:4:4869. T;6 7;86 :57 4@ 4


18/36

'E'ORIALfor PETITIONERXVIII


19/36

BOD$ OF AR GU 'EN TS

CONTENTION 1

WHETHER SECTION 6A WAS APPLICABLE TO 'R. BHUSHAN INCLUDING WHETHER 'R.

BHUSHAN, AN IAS OFFICER OF THE PUN)AB CADRE, WAS AN E'PLO$EE OF THE

CENTRAL GO&ERN'ENT*

1.1 THE PETITIONER WAS AN E'PPLO$EE OF THE CENTRAL GO&ERN'ENT

I: 4@ ;= @=4::6) :;5: :;6 76:4869! 5 IAS 8>>4 :;6 1"*, 5: :;6 P=5 C5)96 4@ 5

67866 8> :;6 C6:95 G8?696:. T;6 A I)45 S69?4 :;6 C8@:4:=:48 8> I)45 )65@ 4:; :;6 798?4@48@ 8?694 :;6 IAS. A@ 769 A9:46 :;6 S:5:6.

1T;6 A I)45 S69?4


20/36

A@8! 5@ 769 A9:4 5 R=6 , >=9:;69 798?4)6@ :;5: 5 >498 86


21/36

1.2 SECTION6AOFTHEDSPE ACT, 16 ISAPPLICABLETOTHEPETITIONER

S6 :;6 DSPE A C6:95 G8?696: :8 44


22/36

2. A C6:95 C4?4 78@: 8: 6@@ :;5 R@. "!000 =: 6@@ :;5 R@. 13!,00

3. A C6:95 C4?4 78@: 8?69 R@. #!000 =: 6@@ :;5 R@. "!000

#. A C6:95 C4?4 78@: ;4 P94


23/36

CONTENTION II

WHETHER 'R. BHUSHANS ARREST COULD BE CLASSIFIED AS #ARREST ON THE SPOT*

2.1 T 4 5 4 74859 9954 ; 4 59 754 ?9= 4 @989

4;4


24/36

@6 :;6 P96?6:48 8> C899=7:48 A 1"**.

IR.R. Kishore v CBI*+! 4: 5@ ;6) :;5: S=-@6 S698 :54

796?48=@ 57798?5 4 5


25/36

:;6 4@:5: :;6 566) @= 5 4:;4 :;6 7=9?46 8>

S6


26/36

'44( @6 :;6 PC A


27/36

5


28/36

3.WHETHERTHETELEPHONETAPON'R. BHUSHANWAS&ALID, ANDWHETHERTHESA'E

WASIN&IOLATIONOFHISCONSTITUTIONALRIGHTTOPRI&AC$*

3.1 N59 5@7 :;6 A


29/36

G8?696: 4@ @5:4@>46) :;5: 4: 4@ 6 :;6 @8?6964:

5) 4:694: 8> I)45 89 :;6 @6 :;6 S:5:6 89 >946) 965:48@ 4:; @8?6964 S:5:6@ 89

7=4< 89)69 89 >89 796?6:4 4>646 7=4< 66966: ;4>6966)8 >98 )569 89 94@ >89 :;6 76876 5: 596. W;6 64:;69 8> :;6@6 :8 4 T;6 I)45 T66957; A 76:4:4869&@

>=)56:5 5) @:5:=:89 94;:@.

3.2 A;8489 89 4 8 5 75 =? 45 959( 5@7 :;6 A


30/36

89)69 8> 4:69 :;6 A :;6 R=6@#35)! :;696>896! :;6 @56 64 6 >5 I)45 A8:;6938200,'11( SCC 0039T;6 I)45 T66957; A


31/36

I)eo%les Union for Civil Lier!ies v. Union of India! 5 PIL :;6 H8&6 S=7966 C8=9: ;5) 4?6

>884 )49689 4:69

:;6 A


32/36

78:6:454:46@! :;6 94;: 8> 794?56 6?4@56) A9:4


33/36

R4;: :8 794?595=)56:5 94;: :8 6 ?485:6) :;6 465 7;86 :57.

52.:.C.. v :"io" o- I")i!, AIR 1997 C 56853AIR 1978 C 597

15
http://fnopenglobalpopup%28%27/ba/disp.asp','16918','1');http://fnopenglobalpopup%28%27/ba/disp.asp','26074','1');http://fnopenglobalpopup%28%27/ba/disp.asp','26074','1');http://fnopenglobalpopup%28%27/ba/disp.asp','16918','1');http://fnopenglobalpopup%28%27/ba/disp.asp','26074','1');


34/36

16


35/36

PRA$ER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE IN THE LIGHT OF ABO&E FACTS STATED, ARGU'ENTS AD&ANCED AND

AUTHORITIES CITED, THE PETITIONER PRA$S BEFORE THE HONBLE COURT TO BE

GRACIOUSL$PLEASEDTO:

1. T;5: 8 K5996@: 8 @78:& 4@ 796@6: 5@ 798?4)6) >89 4 S6 :;6 DSPE A


36/36

C8=@6@ 8 6;5> 8> P6:4:4869

D5:6 KX& F69=59! 2013

Documents

Memorial Submission [Teammoo Code 61]