KEMBAR78
Pool C Moot Case Study | PDF
Scribd
Upload
31 views1 page

Pool C Moot Case Study

Mahesh and Reena were married in 2012. Reena later fell in love with Raj and disappeared from her husband's home to Raj's house. Raj claimed to have married Reena and detained her, threatening Mahesh. Raj was charged with detaining Reena knowing she was married to Mahesh with intent of illicit intercourse. Raj pleaded that Reena's marriage was invalid and her stay was voluntary. The high court found Raj guilty, enhancing his sentence to six months imprisonment. Raj appealed to the Supreme Court which will hear the case on issues of his guilt under Section 498 and validity of the high court's order.

Uploaded by

Pai
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
31 views1 page

Pool C Moot Case Study

Mahesh and Reena were married in 2012. Reena later fell in love with Raj and disappeared from her husband's home to Raj's house. Raj claimed to have married Reena and detained her, threatening Mahesh. Raj was charged with detaining Reena knowing she was married to Mahesh with intent of illicit intercourse. Raj pleaded that Reena's marriage was invalid and her stay was voluntary. The high court found Raj guilty, enhancing his sentence to six months imprisonment. Raj appealed to the Supreme Court which will hear the case on issues of his guilt under Section 498 and validity of the high court's order.

Uploaded by

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

POOL C MOOT CASE STUDY

Mahesh and Reena got married in a Hindu Temple in 2012. A few years
ago, Reena met one Mr. Raj and fell in love with him. One fine day, Reena
disappeared from her husband's house. She was traced to the house of Mr.
Raj. When Mahesh went there and asked Raj to let his wife go with him Raj
told him that he had married her and threatened Mahesh and asked him to go
away.
Raj was charged under S.498 Indian Penal Code for detaining Reena when
he knew or had reason to believe that she was the wedded wife of Mahesh,
with intent to have illicit intercourse with her.
Raj pleaded that Reena was not validly married to Mahesh and that she had
not been detained by him inasmuch as she was tired of living with Mahesh
and had voluntarily and of her free will come to stay with him.
The Magistrate found Raj guilty, convicted him and sentenced him to
undergo simple imprisonment for two months. On appeal, the Sessions
Judge confirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence to a fine of Rs.
50,000/-. Raj filed a revision before the High Court. The High Court issued a
notice of enhancement and after hearing Raj dismissed the revision and
enhanced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for six months.
Being aggrieved by the said order of the High Court, Raj filed a Petition
under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Matter was admitted and has
been kept for final hearing on 2nd March 2017.
The following issues have been raised :-
1. Whether Raj is guilty under Section 498 of the IPC?
2. Whether the order of the High Court is liable to be set aside?

You might also like