Case Planning Chart

Case Name: STATE V. MUKESH

Monika Side
Legal Claim Elements of Claim Facts to support Source of Proof Informal Discovery Formal Discovery Opponent’s Defences
Claim (Theory, Proof,
Discovery)

a) Acquittal of 1) A person who 1) The 1) The statement 1) The 1) ….The The opponent’s case
the accused Is divorced has statement of S.I Satinder characterstic discovery of theory suggests
an option to explains the features documents of that the accused
of the made by the
love someone circumstances which can be previous
charges of else without Monika which are in drawn from deliberately
voluntarily mentions conviction of attacked the victim.
any favour of Monika’s
causing interference about Monika Mukesh. S.I personality the victim and The accused was
grievous from his former being Satinder are that she the order of struggling person
wife. In this reaches to the is master in the
hurt to the assaulted by who was financially
case, Mukesh house of speaking lies magistrate.
victim by and Monika Mukesh many Monika and and there not stable and had
damaging were divorced times before sees that her apparently a habit of
her right eye and Mukesh and also children were seems to be 2) The assaulting the
by poking in could look for about the crying, contradiction discovery of victim. The victim
his future pleading to be in her the CC TV
her eyes car prospects occasions on allowed to statements. had described in
keys and which she footage which her statement to S.I
which he did by keep the On one
thereby being in love reported the presents. This occasion she could form a Satinder that the
causing with Roshni, a matter to the clearly shows explains to part of accused had
wealthy the attitude of S.I. Satinder electronic
grievous police but assaulted her on
divorcee who Monika that Mukesh evidence
hurt to the runs a health refused to towards her had poked numerous
victim. club. There is make children and his car keys . occasions.
no law which statement who shares in her eyes 3) The
prevents two reasons best more affinity and on discovery of
b) Insinuations divorcees from towards the another the copy of They had a settled
known to her.
and being in love. children. occasion in arrangement in
FIR and the
her which Monika had
accusations statement
statement
made by the 2) Monika had a 2) The 2) The Statement that the car recorded by agreed to allow her
victim to the history of being Statement made by keys which children to spend
the victim and
involved in Monika clearly the accused some time with the
accused made by the accused.
criminal states that the had in his
without Monika accused and in
activities and keys which hands went
having any on one clearly states Mukesh had in into her eyes. 4) The view of that Monika
legal basis occasion she that the keys his hands went response allowed Mukesh to
and broke all the which into the eye of take kids for New
recorded by
windows of at Monika and 2) The other
maligning Mukesh had the accused Year celebrations.
the health club this clearly statements
the for no justifiable in his hands suggests that made by her and the victim Despite being
character of reason and was went into the there was no clearly show during cross informed in
the accused fined by the eye of Monika deliberate that she is examination. advance about the
on frivolous local and this intention on trying to timing of returning
magistrate. the part of the falsely
grounds and clearly 5) The nature the children, the
accused to implicate the
thereby suggests that harm the accused. The of injuries accused
causing 3) She had been there was no victim. reasons deliberately did not
convicted thrice suffered by
character deliberate which can be return the children.
for shoplifting the victim
ascribed to Monika was tensed
assaniation and also intention on 3) As per S.I. during the
this kind of
of the pressurized the part of the Satinder, it insinuation scuffle and about the children
accused. Mukesh for lying accused to could be and as she was not
the treatment
to the court that inferred that accusations able to contact her
The harm the thereafter.
she was on the accused are simple
accused medication for victim. was regretting kids. On the next
rather than
makes a depression. the sequence day, he came to
complex. The
humble of events and fact that return the children
3) The fact that the scuffle
request children have and had gifted
this was the which ensued, shown more
discharge expensive presents
first the injury affinity
him of all the which to bribe the children
Christmas towards their
false accidently against me. When
after being father, the
accusations caused to the fact that they Monika asked for
separated victim and d
made by the have all the the children, the
from his the desire of a means and
victim to the accused attacked
children father to meet resources
accused. his children the victim and
created an required for a
after a long better victim’s right was
irrestible time. upbringing of hurt in the scuffle.