LEGAL METHODS ASSIGNMENT-2

MEMORANDUM MAKING

SUBMITTED BY:ARPIT CHAUDHARY

1120202123

BBALLB

SEMESTER 1

SUBMITTED TO:CHANDRESHWARI MINHAS

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW

H.P.N.L.U

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This Assignment Was Upheld by the Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla. I
Might want to Express my Gratitude Toward Dr. Chandreshwari Minhas , Assistant Professor
of Law for Her Help With the Connected points and for Remarks That Enormously Improved
the Original Copy. I Would Thank My Fellow mates Who Gave Knowledge and Ability That
Enormously Helped the Project Despite the Fact That They May Not Concur With the
Entirety of the Interpretations/completions of This Paper I Might likewise need to Show My
Appreciation to My Parents for Imparting Their Pearls of Insight to Me Throughout This
Exploration Work.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……………………….

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS………………………...

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………….

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTIONS……………….

STATEMENT OF FACTS………………………..….

STATEMENT OF ISSUES…………………………..

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS………………….….

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED………………………....

PRAYER FOR RELIEF……………………………….

LAW DECIDED IN CASE…………………………..

JUDGEMENT……………………………………………..

RATIO DECENDI AND OBITER DICTUM……

LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

3
CompLJ Company Law Journal

Corpn. Corporation

Cr. . Criminal

Edn. Edition

Govt. Government

Hon’ble Honourable

i.e. That is

Ltd. Limited No.

Pvt. Private

QB Queens‟ Bench

SC Supreme Court

SCC Supreme Court Cases

v. Versus

Vol. Volume

www World Wide Web

AIR All India Radio

Art Article

& and

i.e that is

INDEX OF AUTHORITY

4
 A CASES REFERRED
AIR 1986 SC 494

1.AIR 1987 SC 982

2.AIR 1986 SC 521

3.PRABHU DAYAL VS TOWN AREA COMMITTEE

4.SMT,NILABATI BAHERA ALIAS LALIT VS STATE OF ORISSA

5. SANTOSH KUMARI VS STATE OF HP

B.DATABASE REFFERED

1. www.judis.nic.in

2. www.lexisnexis.com

3. www.manupatrafast.com

4. www.scconline.co.

5. www.westlaw.com

C.LEGAL DICTIONARY

Aiyer P.R., Advanced Law Lexicon, (3rd ed., 2005)

Garner B.A., Black‟s Law Dictionary, (9th ed., 2009)

5
 Greenberg Daniel, Stroud‟s Judicial Dictionary of Words and Phrases, (4th ed.),

Sweet and Maxwell, Vol. 4

Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, (7th ed., 2008)

D.BOOKS REFERRED
A Lakshminath M Sridhar

, RAMASWAMY IYER’S THE LAW OF TORTS (10th edition)

. A Lakshminath M Sridhar, RAMASWAMY IYER’S THE LAW OF TORTS (10th

M.N. Shukla: The Law Of Torts(20th edition)

. - Dr.S.K.Kapoor on Law of Torts (7th Edition)

.N. Panday : Law of Torts(9th edition)

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

IN THE MATTER OF

6
 BHIM SINGH ………………………………… APPELANT

VS

THE STATE OF JAMMU&KASHMIR……PETITIONER

WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
This case is documented under common writ locale of high court. An appeal to issue a writ
can be recorded under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution in the Supreme Court of India
and under Article 226 in any of the High Courts. Writ petitions assume an essential part in
different cases identifying with implementation of key rights and furthermore openly
interest suit

7
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Shri Bhim Singh, a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, brought
about the fury of the people pulling the strings. They were bowed after keeping him from
going to the meeting of the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, which was to meet
on eleventh September, 1985. That has all the earmarks of being the lone deduction that we
can draw from the conditions of the case to which we will currently allude. On August 17,
1985, the first day of the season of the Budget Session of the Legislative Assembly, Shri
Bhim Singh was suspended from the Assembly. He scrutinized the suspension in the High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir. The request for suspension was remained by the High Court
on ninth September, 1985. On the interceding evening of ninth tenth September, 1985, he was
continuing from Jammu to Srinagar. In transit, at about 3.00 AM (on tenth), he was captured
at a spot called Qazi Kund around 70 kms. from Srinagar. He was removed by the police. As
it was not known where he had been removed and as the endeavors to follow him
demonstrated useless, his better half Smt. Jayamala, following up for his sake, documented
the current application for the issue of a writ to guide the respondents to create Shri Bhim
Singh under the steady gaze of the court, to proclaim his confinement unlawful and to set him
at freedom. She impleaded the State of Jammu and Kashmir through the Chief Secretary as
the main respondent, the Chief Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister and the Inspector General
of Police, Jammu and Kashmir as respondents 2, 3 and 4. On September 13, 1985, we guided
notification to be given to the respondents and we likewise guided the Inspector General of
Police to educate Smt. Jayamala where Shri Bhim Singh was kept in authority. On September
16,1985, Shri Bhim Singh was delivered on bail by the educated Additional Sessions Judge
of Jammu before whom he was created. Shri Bhim Singh documented an advantageous oath
on twentieth September, 1985 expressing more realities notwithstanding what had just been
expressed by Smt. Jayamala in the appeal. He completely attested that he was kept in police
lock up from tenth to 14lh and that he was delivered before a Magistrate unexpectedly just on
the fourteenth. From that point on 24th September, 1985, we gave notice to the Director
General of Police, State of Jammu and Kashmir, Mr. Mir, Superintendent of Police,
Anantnag, Mohd. Shafi Rajguru, Inspector of Police, Amin Amjun, Deputy Superintendent of
Police, Udhampur, Gupta, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jhajar Kolli and the Officer
responsible for Police Station Satwari. A counter oath has been documented in the interest of
the State of Jammu and Kashmir by Abdul Qadir Parrey. Sworn statements have additionally
been documented by M.M. Khajuria, Inspector General of Police, M.A. Mir, Superintendent
of Police, Anantnag, Mohd. Shafi Laigroo, Inspector of Police, District Police Lines,
Anantnag, Mohd. Amin Anjum, Deputy Superintendent of Police Headquarters. Udhampur
and Rajinder Gupta, Probationery Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udhampur. Shri Bhim
Singh has likewise documented a response oath.

8
 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

The legality of detention and whether it qualified as false imprisonment was in

Why person was he presented before the magistrate so late?

What is the scope of section 153?

How can person’s private liberty is not respected?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
The took in insight from the side of the applicant transparently denied different gatherings
contention that he was created before the officer on September,11th 1985 and before the Sub
Judge on 13thof September 1985 and even to be analyzed by any specialist to get a Medical
Certificate that was utilized for getting a remand for 1 day from the Sub Judge. They
acknowledge that on the 14thof September 1985 his customer was delivered under the
watchful eye of the Sub Judge, Jammu, and remanded for 2 days of legal care. They likewise
acknowledge that from there on the sixteenth of September, his customer was acquired front
of the Additional Sessions Judge and was allowed bail. They further additionally contended
that during police authority his customer had been hassled by the confined police.

SCOPE OF SECTION 153(A)

9
Whoever by words, either spoken or composed, or by signs or by obvious portrayals or
something else, elevates or endeavors to advance, on grounds of religion, race, spot of birth,
home, language, rank or network or some other ground at all, disharmony or sensations of
hostility, disdain or malevolence between various strict, racials, language or territorial
gatherings or stations or networks, or

submits any demonstration which is biased to the upkeep of amicability between various
strict, racial, language or territorial gatherings or stations or networks, and which upsets or is
probably going to upset the public peacefulness, or

puts together any activity, development, drill or other comparative movement proposing that
the members in such action will utilize or be prepared to utilize criminal power or savagery or
realizing that it will generally be likely that the members in such action will utilize or be
prepared to utilize criminal power or viciousness, or partakes in such action meaning to
utilize or be prepared to utilize criminal power or brutality or realizing that it generally will
be likely that the members in such action will utilize or be prepared to utilize criminal power
or brutality, against any strict, racial, language or local gathering or standing or network and
such action in any way, shape or form causes or is probably going to cause dread or cautionor
a sensation of frailty among individuals from such strict, racial, language or territorial
gathering or position or network, will be rebuffed with detainment which may stretch out to
three years, or with fine, or with both. Offense submitted instead of love, and so forth —
Whoever submits an offense determined in sub-segment (1) in any spot of love or in any get
together occupied with the presentation of strict love or strict functions, will be rebuffed with
detainment which may reach out to five years and will likewise be at risk to fine.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Shri Bhim Singh, a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, brought
about the rage of the people pulling the strings. They were twisted after keeping him from
going to the meeting of the Authoritative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, which was to
meet on eleventh September, 1985. That seems, by all accounts, to be the lone induction that
we can draw from the conditions of the case to which we will currently allude. On August 17,
1985, the first day of the season of the Budget Session of the Legislative Get together, Shri
Bhim Singh was suspended from the Assembly. He scrutinized the suspension in the High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir. The request for suspension was remained by the High Court
on ninth September, 1985. On the interceding evening of ninth tenth September, 1985, he was
continuing from Jammu to Srinagar. In transit, at about 3.00 AM (on tenth), he was captured
at a spot called Qazi Kund around 70 kms. from Srinagar. He was removed by the police. As
it was not known where he had been removed and as the endeavors to follow him

10
 demonstrated purposeless, his significant other Smt. Jayamala, following up on his benefit,
documented the current application for the issue of a writ to guide the respondents to deliver

Shri Bhim Singh under the steady gaze of the court, to pronounce his confinement illicit and
to set him at freedom. She impleaded the State of Jammu and Kashmir through the Chief
Secretary as the main respondent, the Boss Minister, the Deputy Chief Minister and the
Inspector General of Police, Jammu and Kashmir as respondents 2, 3 and 4. On September
13, 1985, we guided notification to be given to the respondents furthermore, we likewise
guided the Inspector General of Police to advise Smt. Jayamala where Shri Bhim Singh was
kept in guardianship. On September 16,1985, Shri Bhim Singh was delivered on bail by the
taken in Additional Sessions Judge of Jammu before whom he was delivered. Shri Bhim
Singh recorded a beneficial testimony on twentieth September, 1985 expressing more
realities notwithstanding what had as of now been expressed by Smt. Jayamala in the appeal.
He completely attested that he was kept in police lock up from tenth to 14lh and that he was
delivered before a Magistrate unexpectedly just on the fourteenth. From that point on 24th
September, 1985, we gave notice to the Director General of Police, State of Jammu and
Kashmir, Mr. Mir, Superintendent of Police, Anantnag, Mohd. Shafi Rajguru, Inspector of
Police, Amin Amjun, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udhampur, Gupta, Deputy Director
of Police, Jhajar Kolli and the Officer accountable for Police Station Satwari. A counter oath
has been recorded in the interest of the State of Jammu and Kashmir by Abdul Qadir Parrey.
Oaths have likewise been documented by M.M. Khajuria, Inspector General of Police, M.A.
Mir, Superintendent of Police, Anantnag, Mohd. Shafi Laigroo, Inspector of Police, District
Police Lines, Anantnag, Mohd. Amin Anjum, Deputy Superintendent of Police Headquarters.
Udhampur and Rajinder Gupta, Probationery Deputy Superintendent of Police, Udhampur.
Shri Bhim Singh has likewise documented a reply oath.

The solicitor an individual from authoritative amass from the province of Jammu and
Kashmir was captured and confined in police care and was purposely kept from going to the
parliament meetings to be hung on September eleventh, 1985. He was captured t on the claim
that a case under area 153A of Ranbir Penal Code was enlisted against him for conveying a
malignant/rebellious discourse at the public social occasion close to the procession ground in
Jammu on eighth September 1985. He was not created before any officer until the thirteenth
of September. There was additionally a democratic meeting at the get together which he
evidently missed, where his vote was critical however the individual to whom he needed to
make the choice won yet his entitlement to cast a ballot was encroached.

PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the facts presented, issues raised, arguments advanced,
and authorities cited, the Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner humbly pray before
this Hon’ble court that it may be pleased to adjudge and declare

•
11
 Or pass any other order, direction or relief that the court may deem fit in the
light of equity, justice, and good conscience and for this Act of Kindness of
Your Lordship the Petitioner shall as duty bound

ever pay. Sd/- _______________________

COUNSELS FOR APPELANT

JUDGEMENT
In the wake of hearing the contentions from both the gatherings and considering current
realities of the case the noteworthy Supreme Court saw that the law implementation
authorities acted in an extremely most discretionary manner and managed "if the non-public
freedom of an individual from the assembly is to be played inside this design one can just
think about what may befall lesser humans". Pushing ahead the peak court helped the

12
 obligations to remember "police authorities who are the caretakers of peace inside the state
ought to have the best regard for private freedom of residents and won't skim the laws by
halting to such strange demonstrations of wilderness. Overseers of lawfulness mustn't
become depredators of common freedoms. Their obligation is to shield and to kidnap."
Chinnappa Reddy J. furthermore, Khalid J. followed the decision of Supreme Court in Rudul
Shah and Sebastian Hongray cases and communicated the view that when somebody includes
us with the objection that he has been captured and detained with wicked and pernicious
purpose which his Constitutional and legitimate rights were attacked, the wickedness or
malignance and intrusion probably won't be washed away or whisked-away by his being free.
The candidate for such gross infringement of his essential rights conceded to him by the
constitution of the nation was granted financial pay via model expenses. inside the instances
of ' Rudul Shah v. Province of Bihar and Anr.' and inside the instance of ' Sebastian Hongray
v. UOI, it totally was seen that simply if there should arise an occurrence of such
infringement of the essential rights gave by the Constitution, it's important to repay the
casualty via model expenses. The respondent, the State of Jammu and Kashmir was requested
to pay to the applicant 5,000 rupees inside 2 months from the date of the judgment. the
number was to be saved with the Registrar of the Court which may then be paid to the
solicitor

RATIO DESCENDI AND ORBITER DICTUM

13
 during his detention period which led him to so many troubles before he was presented
infront of the magistrate.

ORBITER DICTUM
These cases result in infringement of the right to vote of the citizen by detaining him and not
presenting before the authority and moreover harassment during the detention period the
court stated verdicts on all the valid points and the petitioner was granted 5000 compensation
from the respondent.

14
15
16