Scribd
Upload
42 views2 pages

I Moot Court Problem

CRMINAL CASE 2024 MOOT COURT

Uploaded by

afrahshaikh2512
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
42 views2 pages

I Moot Court Problem

CRMINAL CASE 2024 MOOT COURT

Uploaded by

afrahshaikh2512
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

II MOOT COURT PROBLEM

ON CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 Issues for Consideration:

1. Whether the imposition of President’s Rule in the North-Eastern


States is justified under Article 356 of the Constitution of Raver.

Relevant Law: Article 356 allows President's Rule when there is a failure of
constitutional machinery in a state, but it is subject to judicial review as
established in cases like SR Bommai v. Union of India.

 Arguments:

ON ISSUE NO.1

Union Government’s Argument: The President’s Rule was imposed due


to non-compliance by the states during a health crisis, which posed a
threat to public health and governance.
Petitioners' Argument (FFF and Mr. Clarke): The imposition of
Emergency was a violation of federal principles and an attempt to
centralize power. The situation did not warrant such extreme action as
constitutional machinery in the states had not failed.

2. Whether the 106th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2021, is


constitutional.

Relevant Law: Federalism is part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and
the court must assess whether the amendment aims to retain political power
rather than genuine administrative concerns.

 Arguments:
ON ISSUE NO.2
Union Government’s Argument: The creation of new states was
necessary for better governance and administration, particularly in
underdeveloped areas.
Petitioners' Argument: The creation of new states was a politically
motivated act to secure a majority in Parliament, violating the basic
structure of federalism.

3. Whether the 107th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2022, is


constitutional.

Relevant Law: The Supreme Court will likely consider whether the amendment
undermines the autonomy of states and violates the basic structure doctrine.

 Arguments:

ON ISSUE NO.3
Union Government’s Argument: The transfer of subjects from the State
List to the Concurrent List was necessary to meet international obligations
under the Envision 2030 goals and ensure uniform policies in critical
sectors like health.
Petitioners' Argument: This move dilutes the powers of the states,
contravening the federal balance and violating the basic structure of the
Constitution.

Relief Sought:

FFF and Mr. Clarke:

Declare the imposition of President’s Rule unconstitutional and restore the


democratic functioning of the North-Eastern States.

Strike down the 106th and 107th Constitutional Amendments as violative of the
basic structure of the Constitution.

Instruct the Union government to respect the federal structure and provide
adequate safeguards for state autonomy.

Union Government:

Uphold the constitutionality of both the 106th and 107th Amendments, allowing
the Union to continue with the newly created states and implement central
legislation over the newly shifted subjects.

Justify the imposition of President’s Rule as necessary to protect the interests of


the nation and ensure the safety and well-being of citizens, particularly during
the health crisis.

You might also like