PROPOSITION FOR 4th Mock Trial Competition, 2025

A comedic show titled ‘Indiana’s got Blatant’ had become internet sensation in the country of
Indiana. Hosted and produced by an small-time comedian Sukhi Malhotra, the show featured
contestants showcasing their talent infront of a panel of judges and a live audience. A special feature
of the show was its scoring system where contestants rated their own performances and if the score
matched with the Judge’s score then the contestants would win a prize money. Since the show was
aired on a social media platform called YouStream, and was accessible only through a paid
subscription, Sukhi Malhotra was not in need of funds for his show. The revenue generated from the
sale of tickets and money obtained from the paid subscriptions, along with brand deals, helped him
sustain the show and award the prize money as well.
The show was parody of the much popular TV series called ‘Indiana’s Got Talent’. Unlike the T.V.
series, the contestants appeared on the show to showcase their mediocre talents which often led to
ridicule by the Judges and the audience which was thoroughly enjoyed by viewers, earning the show
millions of views. Every episode had different panel of Judges, often famous internet personalities
who sportingly took the jokes on themselves as well. Sukhi Malhotra was the only constant in the
judges panel.
On the fateful day, 25th December 2024, a popular podcaster Rajveer Batliwala, a social media
influencer Ananya Sharma, and a famous YouStreamer Ayan Mukherjee were called upon by Sukhi
Malhotra as judges. The episode which was then recorded, aired on 1st January 2025 for the paid
viewers.
During the show there was raucous laughter and the antics of the contestants as well as the ridiculous
comments of the judges were much enjoyed by the audience, and it looked like this episode would
raise the bar for the future. Everyone was thoroughly enjoying themselves and abuses started flying
about irresponsibly from the side of the judges as well as contestants.
The exchange between the Judges and Participants started becoming more and more personal, which
was recorded on camera (as was the entire show), and simultaneously, audio-video clips of some of
those contentious moments started doing rounds on various social media platforms. Following clips
were widely shared on social media and became “viral” within a span of minutes:

BRIEF FACTS
Clip 1
Contestant Ravi Kumar performing live comedy act wherein he said “How many of you have seen
perfume ads? You know why all such ads have half naked women in them? Because they are made by
men. Ofcourse they are made by men, I mean, its not dinner guys.”
Ananya Sharma picked up the mic and said, “Now I know why you are so single Ravi. No woman
will ever have the guts to even kiss your pig-like face.”
Offended by such statement, Ravi Kumar replied, “Who are you to say that? I bet you are still single
and not worthy enough to have stable relationship with anyone. Rather you look more capable of
having multiple one time relationships with many”
Ananya Sharma said, “Sir, I doubt you've been close to a woman since the day you were born. And
the only woman you have been ever physically close to would be your mother, so shut up (followed
by abuses)”.
Clip 2
Contestant Riya Singh performed her story telling of embarrassing moments in her life.
After the performance, Sukhi handed over the mic to Rajveer Batliwala and he commented, “Talking
about embarrassing moments in life which one can never recover from, have you ever walked in your
parents engaged in sexual encounter?” She did not respond.
Sukhi took the Mic and asked the contestant: “Speaking of embarrassing moments, tell us how many
boyfriends have you had in the past”?
Riya Singh replied: I’ve had plenty, but I can’t disclose that here- It’s a matter of my privacy” (with a
smile on her face).
Sukhi (laughing sarcastically) said: “Oh, I thought you’d share that too while talking about
embarrassing moments. Anyway, let me ask something more relevant. What’s your Body Count?”
The girl looked embarrassed and said: ‘I choose not to answer that question.”
Rajveer took the mic and said: “Madam why do you feel shy? These days, it’s considered a matter of
pride. The higher the count, the greater the charm. Isn’t that right?”
(The audience started hooting, showing their approval of the remark.)
She replied: “Well, there is a way to find that out. Actually you’ll know once you’re included in that
count”. Saying this, she smiled and started laughing.
(There was a huge cheer and laughter from the audience.)

Clip 3
Contestant Manu performed an act displaying her poor singing skills and ended her performance by
the remark, “Bohot accha performance na lage toh bhi muh bandh rakhna kyuki tumhe pata nahi main
kaha se aayi hu”. With much-rehearsed swagger, in an attempt to look cool, she went on to say- “Main
toh yaha tum logon ke maze lene aayi thi, talent prove karne nahi”.
It was then followed by comments by Judges.
One of the fellow judges, Ayan Mukherjee said, “Sister, please go back wherever you came from. The
utter lack of talent is so astonishing. You don’t deserve to sing or perform ever. Don't show us your
background because your talent say enough about that”
To this, the other judge, Sukhi Malhotra said- “Itna confidence aapko bilkul suit nahi karta madam.
Yaha tak pahuchna bhi aapke liye over achievement hai”. After a brief laughter by the judges, he went
on to say- “With looks like yours and no talent, it's a surprise you're not doing something else for
attention.”
Rajveer took the Mic and said- “With moves like that, you’re definitely going to get attention, but not
the kind this stage is meant for”.
The contestant was taken aback by those comments, but she smiled as everyone was laughing, and
asked the judges, “What do you mean?” The judges didn’t respond.
The PR group of the Show had released various clips from the episode on social media. As expected,
the clips gained a lot of traction, however, mixed reactions were received, where some of the viewers
could not stop laughing hysterically at the jokes made, but many of the viewers became incensed at
the callousness employed in their language by the people on stage, especially by the judges.
Soon social media started running posts like, like ‘Absolutely tasteless: The jokes no one wants to
hear on Indiana’s got Blatant’, ‘Banning or Jail: What is most appropriate for such people on
Indiana’s got Blatant’, ‘Sukhi Malhotra: the one behind scaring our youth’. Social media became
flooded with hate-posts against all the judges and “Boycott” messages started flying around.
Viewing such hatred by masses, Sukhi Malhotra returned all tickets to his stand-up special to be aired
in following month. Influencer Ananya Sharma had to relocate from her residence upon receiving
death and rape threats. YouStreamer Ayan Mukherjee and Podcaster Rajveer Batliwala returned back
to their hometowns. Sukhi Malhotra also deleted all the episodes uploaded of the show.
On 26th January 2025, a First Information Report (FIR) was filed against some of the Judges.
DISCLAIMER
1- The Laws of the State of Indiana are in Pari Materia with that of the Union of India and must be
interpreted in its true sense and spirit.
2- The case proposition for this Mock Trial Competition is inspired by a real-life incident, but has
been significantly modified, fictionalized, and adapted for academic purposes. All characters, events,
and legal issues presented have been constructed solely for the purpose of simulation and academic
engagement. While the core theme may draw from real events, any resemblance to actual persons or
proceedings is purely coincidental or used under fair use principles for educational purposes.
The organizers affirm that this material is a work of adaptation, and no infringement of copyright,
defamation, or violation of privacy is intended. The content is not meant to comment upon or reflect
the views of any real individual or institution.
3- This proposition is purely intended for 4th MAIMS Mock Trial Competition, 2025 and educational
purposes amongst law students.
4- The contents of the present Mock Trial proposition are not intended to defame/denigrate/hurt the
feelings/sentiments of any individual(s)/class/classes of individuals, institution(s),
community/communities, or organisation(s).
ANNEXURE 1
 ANNEXURE 2

PROSECUTION STATEMENTS
RIYA SINGH

My name is Riya, age 24 years. I appeared as a contestant on the show Indiana’s got Blatant,
recorded on 25th December 2024 and aired on 1st January 2025 on the platform YouStream.
I joined the show thinking it was meant to be a fun, light-hearted space where people shared
talents and funny life stories in a respectful way.

As part of my act, I performed a storytelling bit based on some embarrassing moments from
my life to connect with the audience through humour. But instead of sticking to playful
comedy, the judges especially Mr. Sukhi Malhotra and Mr. Rajveer Batliwala crossed the line
with inappropriate and downright offensive comments. I was subjected to a series of obscene,
humiliating, and deeply inappropriate remarks by the judges on the panel.

Mr. Rajveer Batliwala directed an extremely vulgar and insensitive question towards me,
saying, “Have you ever walked in on your parents engaged in sexual encounter?”I froze. I
couldn’t comprehend how that could be considered a joke, let alone a question to ask on a
public platform. Before I could even process it, Mr. Sukhi Malhotra added, “So how many
boyfriends have you had?” I said it was private, but he pushed further, asking, “What’s your
body count?” I tried to stay composed and declined to answer, but Mr. Rajveer went on to
say, “Why so shy? These days it’s something to be proud of—the higher the count, the more
the charm.” The audience laughed and cheered, but I was shaken. I may have smiled
nervously at the end, but inside, I felt humiliated. This wasn’t comedy.

The remarks made against me were inappropriate and disregarded my dignity and respect.
The judges crossed all boundaries of decency and turned my performance into an opportunity
to mock, sexualize, and demean me for the entertainment of others.

It felt like they used my time on stage to sexualize and mock me for their own
entertainment.What hurts even more is how it’s all gone viral. People online are laughing,
making memes, mocking me. I went there to share something of myself, to make people
laugh with me, not at me. The feeling of being violated in front of cameras and millions of
viewers. It has been overwhelming. This pain is real.
 MANU SHARMA
My name is Manu, aged 28 years. I participated as a contestant on the episode of Indiana’s
Got Blatant that was filmed on 25th December 2024 and aired on 1st January 2025. I came to
the show thinking it would be a fun, chill experience. I ended my performance with a bold
line:“Bohot accha performance na lage toh bhi muh bandh rakhna kyu ki tumhe pata nahi
main kaha se aayi hu”. Then, with a bit of sass, I added “Main toh yaha tum logon ke maze
lene aayi thi, talent prove karne nahi” and it was meant to be a cheeky comment to reflect
confidence.

However, the feedback I received from the judges quickly took a harsh and deeply personal
turn. After my performance, the judges, instead of offering constructive feedback or light-
hearted banter, launched into personal attacks that left me deeply hurt and humiliated. Judge
Mr. Ayan Mukherjee dismissed my performance not only on grounds of talent but in terms
that attacked my worth and background, stating I should “go back wherever I came from”
and that I “don’t deserve to sing or perform ever”. “Don't show us your background because
your talent say enough about that”. My confidence, appearance, and very presence on the
stage were mocked and questioned.
Mr. Sukhi Malhotra escalated the commentary by suggesting my presence on stage was an
“overachievement” and made a remark targeting my looks and suggesting that I was seeking
attention through inappropriate means by stating that “Itna confidence aapko bilkul suit nahi
karta madam. Yaha tak pahuchna bhi aapke liye over achievement hai”. After a brief laughter
by the judges, he went on to say, “With looks like yours and no talent, it's a surprise you're
not doing something else for attention.”

And Mr. Rajveer Batliwala? He didn’t hold back either. With a smirk, he said my moves
might get me attention—but not the kind “this stage is meant for.” That one sentence attacked
my dignity and shattered my confidence of performing on the stage in future.

None of these remarks were about my performance. These remarks weren’t just unkind, they
were gendered and meant to diminish me as a woman. They weren’t trying to help me grow
they were trying to tear me down. On a national platform, in front of cameras, in front of an
audience, my appearance, my background, my femininity, even my right to stand there were
all ridiculed for entertainment. I smiled through it. But inside? I was shattered. No one should
have to walk off a stage feeling like their existence was a joke. Since then, I’ve been facing
online harassment, messages of hate, whispers of mockery, as if what they said gave people
permission to continue the bullying. It’s exhausting. It’s unfair. And it’s deeply hurtful.

AUDIENCE (AYUSHI KALRA)

My name is Ayushi Kalra, aged 27 years. I was in the audience on December 25th for
Indiana’s Got Blatant. I showed up expecting some laughs, a fun evening. But what I saw
was honestly disturbing.

At first, there was laughter but as the episode went on when a contestant Riya shared personal
and humorous moments from her life, she was met with degrading comments from the
judges. When she tried to draw a boundary saying certain things were private, those
boundaries were ignored. The judges joked about her body count and sexual history.

When Manu came on stage, she delivered her act with confidence and a sense of humour. I
found her boldness refreshing. But the way the judges responded was shocking. Their
comments weren’t critiques. They mocked her looks, her background, and implied that her
presence on stage was only worthy insinuating things no woman should be subjected to under
any circumstance.

Sitting in that audience, I felt incredibly uncomfortable. The laughter around me began to feel
disturbing. I remember catching eyes with another woman nearby—we both had the same
uneasy expression. It didn’t feel like we were watching a comedy show anymore. It felt like
we were watching a public shaming.

It made me realize just how normal it’s become to degrade women and laugh at their
expense. It wasn’t just unfunny but was upsetting.
 ANNEXURE 3

Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY

Govt. of MAHARASHTRA
Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana
Tel: 275558

Accredited by the National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL)

Examination Report

Report No. FSL 2025/P-121/PHY-152/11 Dated: 26/05/2025

To

Sh. R. Desai, IPS

D.I.G. of Police,
Maharashtra, Indiana

Your Letter No. CRM/11SE/DP/2025 Dated 30.01.2025 regarding two parcels in connection
with case FIR No. 234 Dated 26.01.2025 u/s 294 & 79 of BNS, 2023, and u/s 67 of I.T. Act,
P.S. Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana, duly received in this office on 30.01.2025 through
Insp. Sher Singh C.R. I.D. 78/2024.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL(S) / EXHIBIT(S)

Sealed cloth parcel : 01 (One)

Sealed envelope : 01 (One)

Total : 02 (Two)

Two sealed parcels, seals were intact and tallied with the specimen seals as per
forwarding letter (FSL FORM).

2. DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES CONTAINED IN PARCEL(S)/EXHIBITS (S)

Parcel 1: One sealed cloth parcel, sealed with the seals of “TSR” at eight places, stated to
be containing two memory cards; on opening, two memory cards were found and they
were marked as “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-2” in the laboratory.

Exhibit-1: One memory card of “Sandisk” make, bearing serial number B4356784273
(Made in China) containing video recordings.
 Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

Exhibit-2: One memory card of “Sandisk” make, bearing serial number B32784612394
(Made in China) containing video recordings.

Parcel 2: One sealed envelope, sealed with the seals of “TSR” at eight places, stated to be
containing one DVD; one opening, one DVD was found and it was marked as “Exhibit-3”
in the laboratory.

Exhibit-3: One DVD of “Moserbear” make, containing one video file and digital photos.

3. RESULT OF EXAMINATION / OPINION:

The memory card marked “Exhibit-1” contains 105 video clips and the
memory card marked “Exhibit-2” contains 237 video clips. On examination it was
found that there were no deleted files in the memory cards “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-
2”, DVD marked “Exhibit-3” contains a video file in the format ‘Video.WAV” which
is a full video of clips that are contained in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1” &
“Exhibit-2”.

On examination of video recordings in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1” and

“Exhibit-2”, the followings points were observed:

1. The video recordings in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-2”

contain the camera video shots in separate video clips. The video clips in memory
cards marked “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-2” contain 105 and 237 identified video
shots respectively.

2. The video recordings in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-2” are in
digital video format and there are no indication of alteration in the identified
video shots on the basis of examination using Non-Linear Editing & Storage
System & Video Analyst System.

3. DVD marked “Exhibit-3” contains a video file in the format ‘Video.WAV” which
is a full video of the clips that are contained in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1”
and “Exhibit-2”.

NOTE: Case Exhibits sent to this Laboratory for examination have been sealed with the seal
of ‘Dr. D.Yadav-FSL-NAVIMARG’.
Examined by

(Dr. D. Yadav)
Asstt. Director (Physics)
Forensic Science Laboratory
 Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana

FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY
Govt. of MAHARASHTRA
Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana
Tel: 275558

Accredited by the National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL)

Examination Report

Report No. FSL 2025/P-121/PHY-152/12 Dated:26/05/2025

To

Sh. R. Desai, IPS

D.I.G. of Police,
Maharashtra, Indiana

Your Letter No. CRM/12SE/DP/2025 Dated 30.01.2025 regarding two parcels in connection
with case FIR No. 234 Dated 26.01.2025 u/s 294 & 79 of BNS, 2023, and u/s 67 of I.T. Act,
P.S. Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana, duly received in this office on 30.01.2025 through
Insp. Sher Singh C.R. I.D. 78/2024.

1. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL(S) / EXHIBIT(S)

Sealed cloth parcel : 01 (One)

Sealed envelope : 01 (One)

Total : 02 (Two)

Two sealed parcels, seals were intact and tallied with the specimen seals as per
forwarding letter (FSL FORM).

2. DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES CONTAINED IN PARCEL (S) / EXHIBITS (S)

Parcel 1: One sealed cloth parcel, sealed with the seals of “TSR” at eight places, stated to
be containing two memory cards; on opening, two memory cards were found and they
were marked as “Exhibit-1” and “Exhibit-2” in the laboratory.

Exhibit-1& 2 (for the sake of brevity): Two memory cards of “Sandisk” make, bearing
serial numbers B4356784273 &B32784612394, respectively, containing video
recordings. Facial images found in the video file of following persons were marked in the
following manner:
 Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

Male Person 1 sitting in the chair bearing name “Sukhi” marked as “Exhibit-QM1”
Male Person 2 sitting in the chair bearing name “Rajveer” marked as “Exhibit-QM2”
Male Person 3 performing on stage wearing a badge bearing the name “Ravi” marked as
“Exhibit-QM3”
Female Person 1 sitting in the chair bearing name “Ananya” marked as “Exhibit-QF1”
Female Person 2 performing on stage wearing a badge bearing the name “Riya” marked
as “Exhibit-QF2”
Female Person 3 performing on stage wearing a badge bearing the name “Manu” marked
as “Exhibit-QF3”

Parcel 2: One sealed envelope, sealed with the seals of “TSR” at eight places, stated to be
containing one DVD; it was marked as “Exhibit-3” in the laboratory.

Exhibit-3: One DVD of “Moserbear” make, containing video recordings; on opening,

one DVD was found containing two folders, namely, “Photos” and “Videos”. The folder,
namely, “Photos” contains 6 still images, namely, “DSC00056.JPG”, “DSC00057.JPG”,
“DSC00058.JPG”, “DSC00059.JPG”, “DSC00060.JPG”, “DSC00061.JPG”, and the
folder named “Videos” containing one video file, namely, Video.WAV”.The specimen
sample of facial image of following persons in the video recording and still photographs
(digital) were marked in the following manner:

Male Person 1 in “DSC00056.JPG”marked as “Exhibit-SM1”

Male Person 2in “DSC00057.JPG” marked as “Exhibit-SM2”
Male Person 3in “DSC00058.JPG” marked as “Exhibit-SM3”
Female Person 1 in “DSC00059.JPG”marked as “Exhibit-SF1”
Female Person 2 in “DSC00060.JPG”marked as “Exhibit-SF2”
Female Person 3 in “DSC00061.JPG”marked as “Exhibit-SF3”.

3. RESULT OF EXAMINATION / OPINION:

On examination of video recordings in memory cards marked “Exhibit-1” and

“Exhibit-2”, and video file “Video.WAV” in DVD marked “Exhibit-3”, the followings
points were observed:

1. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Male Person marked “Exhibit-QM1” from the
relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SM1” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QM1”&“Exhibit-SM1” are of the same person.

2. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Male Person marked “Exhibit-QM2” from the
 Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SM2” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QM2” & “Exhibit-SM2” are of the same person.

3. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Male Person marked “Exhibit-QM3” from the
relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SM3” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QM3” & “Exhibit-SM3” are of the same person.

4. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Female Person marked “Exhibit-QF1” from
the relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SF1” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QF1” & “Exhibit-SF1” are of the same person.

5. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Female Person marked “Exhibit-QF2” from
the relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SF2” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QF2” & “Exhibit-SF2” are of the same person.

6. On image analysis and comparison of verbal portrait features, geometrics and facial
image superimposition of the image of Female Person marked “Exhibit-QF3” from
the relevant video frames and still images of the person marked “Exhibit-SF3” from
relevant video frames and still images in Exhibit-3, the images of the male person
marked “Exhibit-QF3” & “Exhibit-SF3” are of the same person.

NOTE: Case Exhibits sent to this Laboratory for examination have been sealed with the seal
of ‘Dr. D.Yadav-FSL-NAVIMARG’.

Examined by

SIGN

(Dr. D. Yadav)
Asstt. Director (Physics)
Forensic Science Laboratory
Navi Marg, Maharashtra, Indiana
 Form No. FSL/NAVIMARG/ FM/01/10/30.01.2025

February 12, 2025

CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 63 (4) (c) of the BHARTIYA SAKSHYA

ADHINIYAM, 2023, ON BEHALF OF iCloud SERVICES (APPLE INC.)

Certified that this WhatsApp Chat of Mobile number 987XXXXXXX(issued in the name
of Rajveer Batliwala) have been retrieved from the iCloud account of the same number and
the chat has been produced from a computer system using printer and its contents are true
reproduction of the original to the best of my knowledge and belief. Further certified that
conditions as laid down in Section 63 (4) (c) of BSA, 2023 regarding the admissibility of
computer output in relation to the information and the computer in question are fully satisfied
in all aspects.

Signature –
Name- Gaurav Jain
Designation – Nodal Officer for iCloud (APPLE INC.)
 ANNEXURE 3
FORENSIC REPORTS AND ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE

WHATSAPP CONVERSATION BETWEEN

SUKHI AND RAJVEER
 ANNEXURE 3
FORENSIC REPORTS AND ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE

WHATSAPP CONVERSATION BETWEEN

SUKHI AND RAJVEER
 ANNEXURE 4

FORM IF5

FINAL FORM / REPORT

(Under Section 193 BNSS)

IN THE COURT OF ……M…

AG…
IS…
TR… ……………………………………….
ATE

1. *Dist: …
NA…
VI …
MA…
RG… *P.S……
NAVI…
MA……… *Year …
RG 20…
25 ……… *FIR N o : …2 3…
4 ……… *Date:…26…
.01…
.2025

2. Final Report/Charge-Sheet No: …

198…
/20…
25 ……………………………….. 3. *Date: …
28.…
05.…
202…
5 ………

4. (i) *Act: B…
NS…..……………………………… *Section: 2… 94 ………………………………………
(ii) *Act: …B NS.......................................................................... *Section: …79 ………………………………………
(iii) *Act: …. .
IT A C T ............................................................................ *Section: …
6 7 ………………………………………
(iv) *Other Acts and Sections:N… IL ……………….…………………………………………………….

5. *Type of final Report: Charge-Sheet/Untraced/Unoccurred/Not Charge-Sheet for want of

evidence : …
CH…AR…
GE…
SH…EE…
T ……………………………………………………………………….……

6. *If F.R. unoccurred: False / Mistake of fact / Mistake of law/Non-cognizable/Civil nature:……….

…
NIL……………………………………………………………………………………………………..

7. *If supplementary or original: …

OR…
IGI…
NA…
L …………………………………………………………...

8. Name of the I.O. …

SH …
ER …
SIN…
GH……………………Rank …
INS…
PE…
CT…
OR…………………………………

(a) Name of Complainant / Informant: …

MA…
NU…
SH…
AR…
MA……
&RIY…
A S…
ING…
H ………………………………

(b). Father’s / Husband’s Name: …S…

UDESH KUMAR & BALDEV S ING H
…… ……… ……… … … ……………………………….

10. Date of properties / Articles / Documents recovered / seized during investigation and relied upon
(separate list can be attached, if necessary).

Sl. Property Estimated value P.S. property From whom/where Disposal

No description (in Rs.) Register No. recovered or
seized
1 2 3 4 5 6

NIL
11. Particulars of accused persons charge-sheeted:
(use separate sheet for each accused)

Sl.No……..
(i). *Name: …
SU…
KH…
I M…
AL…
HO…
TR…
A ……………………… Whether verified………………………..

(ii) Father’s/Husband’s Name: ……

SA NJ…
EE…
V M…
A L…
HO…
T RA……………………………. …………………

(iii). Date/Year of Birth: …

15…
.11…
.19…
93 ………………………………………………………………

(iv). Sex: …
MA…
LE ……………………………(v) Nationality …
IN…
DIA…
N ……………………………….

(vi). Passport No: …

67…
89 …………………… Date of issue … …
2012 …………………………………..

Place of Issue D
…E…
LHI…
, IN…
DI…
AN…
A ………………………………………………………………..

(vii). Religion: …H…

IND…
U ……………………. (viii) Whether SC/ST …
NO…………………………….

(ix). Occupation: …
PR…
OF…
ES…
SI…
ON…
AL…
CO…
M…ED…
IAN………………………………………………………..

(x). Address: …
B…96 …
NA…
VI …
MA…
RG…
M…AH…
AR…
AS…
HT…
RA…
IN… …
DIA ……………………………………………...
NA

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Whether verified: …YE…S ……………………………………………………………………….
(xi). * Provisional Criminal No.: …1… …
0023 …………………………………………………………

(xii). *Regular Criminal no: …N…

O ………………………………………………………………….

(if known)
(xiii). Date of arrest: …
26.0…
1.2…
025……………………………………………………………………….

(xiv). *Date of release on bail …

26…
.01…
.20…
25…………………………………………………………..

(xv). *Date on which forwarded to Court: 2…

7.0… …
1.202…
5 …………………………………………….

(xvi). *Under Acts & Sections: 7…

9,…
29…
4 B…
NS…
, 6…
7 IT… …T ……………………………………………….
AC

……………………………………………………………………………………………….
(xvii). *Name(s) and Address(es) of sureties: …
MR… …
S. S …
UM …M…
AN …
ALH …
OTRA…
S/…
O S…
UK…
HI …
MA… …
LHOTR…
A ……………

… …B…
R/O 96……
NAVI……
MAR……
GM …A…
AH RA…
SH…
TR… …D…
A IN IAN…
A …………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
(xviii). Previous convictions with case references: … …
NONE …………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
(xix). *Status of the accused:

Forwarded / Bailed by Police / Under Police Custody / Bailed by Court / In judicial

Custody / Absconding / proclaimed Offender:
12. Particulars of accused persons charge-sheeted:
(use separate sheet for each accused)

Sl.No……..
(i). *Name: …
RA… …
JVE …B…
ER AT… …
LIWAL…
A …………………… Whether verified………………………..

(ii) Father’s/Husband’s Name: …

VI…
KR…
AM…
BA…
TLI…
WA…
LA ……………………………. …………………

(iii). Date/Year of Birth: ……2…

4/0
… 9/…
19…
93…………………………………………………………

(iv). Sex: …
MA…
LE ……………………………(v) Nationality …
IN…
DIA…
N ……………………………….

(vi). Passport No: …

78…
90 …………………… Date of issue … …
2012 …………………………………..

Place of Issue M
…A…
HA…
RA…
SH…
TR…
A, …
IND…
IA…
NA………………………………………………………..

(vii). Religion: …H…

IND…
U ……………………. (viii) Whether SC/ST …
NO…………………………….

(ix). Occupation: ……P…

OD…C…
AS…
TE…R………………………………………………………………..
(x). Address: …9…
8…TIL
…A…
KM
…A…
R…GM
…A…
H…AR…
AS
…H…
TR
…A…
IN…
DI…
AN…
A…………………………………...

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Whether verified: …YE…S ……………………………………………………………………….
(xi). * Provisional Criminal No.: ……1…
00…
02…
4 ……………………………………………………
(xii). *Regular Criminal no: …N…
O ………………………………………………………………….

(if known)
(xiii). Date of arrest: …
26.0…
1.2…
025……………………………………………………………………….

(xiv). *Date of release on bail …

26…
.01…
.20…
25…………………………………………………………..

(xv). *Date on which forwarded to Court: 2…

7.0… …
1.202…
5 …………………………………………….

(xvi). *Under Acts & Sections: 7…

9,…
29…
4 B…
NS…
, 6…
7 IT… …T ……………………………………………….
AC

……………………………………………………………………………………………….
(xvii). *Name(s) and Address(es) of sureties: …
MR… …
S. S …
UM …M…
AN …
ALH …
OTRA…
S/…
O S…
UK…
HI …
MA… …
LHOTR…
A ……………

… …B…
R/O 96……
NAVI……
MAR……
GM …A…
AH RA…
SH…
TR… …D…
A IN IAN…
A …………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
(xviii). Previous convictions with case references: … …
NONE …………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
(xix). *Status of the accused:

Forwarded / Bailed by Police / Under Police Custody / Bailed by Court / In judicial

Custody / Absconding / proclaimed Offender:
13. Particulars of witnesses to be examined:

Type of
Father’s/Husband’s Date/year of
Sl. No. Name Occupation Address evidence to
Name birth
be tendered.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 RIYA SINGH BALDEV SINGH 15/11/2000 NONE H 56 COMPLAINAN
GANDHI T TO PROVE
CHOWK HER
MP STATEMENT
INDIANA
2 MANU SHARMA SUDESH KUMAR 19/06/1996 NONE R 1/34 COMPLAINAN
BATA T TO PROVE
CHOWK HER
BIHAR STATEMENT
INDIANA

3 AYUSHI KALRA RAJIV KALRA 23/08/2001 ENGINEER 4, SKY

TOWER ORAL
MAHAR-
ASHTRA
INDIANA

4 DR. D. YADAV UMESH YADAV 20/11/1970 Asstt. Director FSL, ORAL /

(Physics) MAHARAS DOCUMENTA
TRA,INDIA RY
NA

14. If F.R. is false, indicate action taken or proposed to be taken u/s 217/248 BNS.:

NO…
… NE………………………………………………………………………………………………..

15. Result of Laboratory Analysis:

SH…
… EE
… T…
AT…
TA…
CH
… E…
D …………………………………………………………………………………..
16. Brief facts of the case (Add separate sheet, if necessary)

…T…
wo…c…
om…
pl…
ain…
an…
ts…
na…
m…ed…
M…an…
uS
…h…
arm
…a…
an
…d…
Ri…
ya…
Si…
ng…
h v…
is…
ite…
dN
…av…
iM
…a…
rg…
Po…
lic…
e…sta…
tio…
n…on…..

…2…
6.…
01… …
.202…
5 a…
nd…p…
roc…
ee…
de…
d…to … …
recor…
d… …2…
FIR 34…
/2…
02…
5. …
Th……IR…d…
eF …
etaile…
d…inc…
id…
en…
ts …
rel…
ate…
d…to …
a …..
popular show Indiana’s got Blatant. Following were the details -
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Manu sharma on 25.12.2024 reached HABITAT CENTRE at 7:00 PM and performed live singing on stage at 8:15
……
PM . ,…
Su…khi…
Ma…lho… tra…
an… dR… ajv…ee…
r B…
atli…
wa…la k…
ep…t la…
ugh…
ing…at…he…
r. A…fte…
r th…
is,…
the…ju…
dge…s s…tar…
ted…ins… ult…
ing… he…
r b… ut a… …
ll w as..
encourgaed by Sukhi Malhotra and Rajveer as they cheered and mocked her. They passed comments like 'go back
…
wh… ere… yo…
u c…
am…e f…rom …
', …
as …
if p…eop…
le …
fro…m h…er …
sta…
te …hav…
e n…
o t…
ale…
nt w…ha…tso…ev…er.…
Th…ey …
ind…irec…tly…
ca…lled… he…
r a…'p…ros… titu…te' ..
and told her she should go somewhere where men will give her attention. The clips became viral. Her parents were
…
lef…
t wi… …
th no…cho…ice… bu…
t to…no… …
t leav…
e h…om… e. …
Su…ch …
obc… en…
e a…
nd… de…
rog… ato…
ry …sta…
tem…
en…t m…ad…e to… he…
r, l…
ed… to …
her… fat…
he… r be… ing..
asked to leave the workshop where he worked as a mechanic. They have corrupted the society with their pathetic
… …
sho w…
an… …
d ru …
ine …
d h er…
life…
fo…
rev…
er.…………………………………………………………………………..

Ri…
… ya …
Sin…
gh…
on…25…
.12…
.20…
24…pe…rfor…
me… d l…
ive…
at …
HA…BIT…
AT…C…
EN… TR…E. E
… ve…ryt…
hin…
g w…
as… go…ing…
we…
ll b…
ut …
the…
n S…
uk…
hi M
…al…
hot…
ra ..
mocked her so much. She still put on a smile understanding that its the format of the show but then Rajveer Batliwala
…
ma…
de…
su…
ch…
se…
xua… …
l com…
me…
nts…
on…
he…
r th…
at …
she…is…
no…
lon…
ge…
r a…
ble…
to …
sho…
w…her…
fac…
e i…
nfr…
ont…
of …
the…
so…
cie…
ty. …
He…
as…
ked…
he…
r, .
that too, infront of live audience, if she have walked on her parents being engaged in sexual act. Not only this, he
…
as…
ked… …
he r h…
ow…m… any… pe…op…le s…
he…
ha…s s…lep…
t w…
ith.…
O…n s…
tag…e, s…he…fel…
t un…
sa…fe …and… sc…are…
d s…
o s…he…we …
nt…alo…
ng… wit…
hw…
ha…
t ..
was being said. she had to do it to save her dignity as a woman. Her parents have disowned her and not taking her
…
ca…
lls.…sh…
e is… n…
o lo…
ng… er a…
ble… to…
ap…
ply…
fo…r an…
y j…
obs…as…w…ell.…
Th… is s…
ho…w is… …
na tio…
na…lly v…
iew…
ed…m… ost…
ly b…
y y…
ou…ng …
tee…ns…
an…
d is..
extremely dangerous for their mental well being.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
…
As…
a r…
es…
ult,…
bo…
th a…
cc…
use……
dwer…
e a…
rre…
ste…
d u… …
/s 79…
294……S…
BN an…
d 6… …A…
7 IT ct o……
n2 …
6.01.…
202…
5 …………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

17. Refer Notice served Yes/No Date: 28.05.2025 …………

18. Despatched on 28.05.202…

5 …………..

Forwarded by Station House Officer Signature of the Investigating officer

Officer/Officer in-charge submitting the Final Report / Charge Sheet

Name: … …
KAA M…
SW…
AR…
OO…
P ………….. Name: …
SH…
ER… …
SIN …………………….
GH

Rank…
INS…
PE… …
CTOR ……….. No…
24 ………….. Rank… …
INSPE…
CT…
OR……..No…
78 …………..
 ANNEXURE 5
Disclaimer on Procedure
Note on Trial Procedure under BNSS, 2023:
As per Sections 255 and 256 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the accused is called
upon to enter their defense only after the prosecution concludes its evidence. Defense witnesses are
examined subsequently, and not simultaneously.
However, in this mock trial competition, the statements of defense witnesses are being released along
with the problem to ensure equal opportunity for preparation and understanding of both sides of the
case. Participants are expected to maintain the procedural integrity during the trial rounds — i.e.,
prosecution case first, followed by defense.

ANNEXURE 5
STATEMENTS OF DEFENCE WITNESSES

DW1- Sukhi ( Producer)- I, Sukhi Malhotra, am the producer of the show Indiana’s Got
Blatant. This show started in 2024 with a vision to create a satirical entertainment show
designed for mature, consenting audiences. From its very inception, the show was positioned
as a parody of traditional talent shows where self-deprecating humour, mutual roasting, and
exaggerated performances were not only expected but celebrated.

It was meant to be satire – a parody. We called it ‘blatant’ because it was supposed to be raw,
unscripted and outrageous. Our motto was: “If you’re average, you’re perfect.” That’s why so
many people applied not to win fame, but to laugh at themselves. They knew what they were
signing up for. Moreover, we didn’t hide the format. It was public. Every contestant signed a
waiver agreement, they were briefed on the tone and content to be used during the shoot, and
everyone – including Ravi, Riya, Manu laughed during the shoot. You can check the uncut
footage.

Importantly, our show is hosted exclusively on YouStream, a paid subscription platform.

Every viewer who accessed the show voluntarily paid for the content after reviewing its
trailer, theme, and content style. The subscription model clearly outlines that the show
contains adult humour, sarcasm, parody, and provocative commentary and by subscribing,
viewers acknowledge and consent to such content. It is not publicly broadcasted or accessible
to general audiences, including minors.

With respect to the episode in question, all participants, including Ravi Kumar, Riya Singh,
and Manu, were informed in writing that the format includes intense satire, roast-style

DW1- Sukhi ( Producer)- I, Sukhi Malhotra, am the producer of the show Indiana’s Got
Blatant. This show started in 2024 with a vision to create a satirical entertainment show
designed for mature, consenting audiences. From its very inception, the show was positioned
as a parody of traditional talent shows where self-deprecating humour, mutual roasting, and
exaggerated performances were not only expected but celebrated.
It was meant to be satire – a parody. We called it ‘blatant’ because it was supposed to be raw,
unscripted and outrageous. Our motto was: “If you’re average, you’re perfect.” That’s why so
many people applied not to win fame, but to laugh at themselves. They knew what they were
signing up for. Moreover, we didn’t hide the format. It was public. Every contestant signed a
waiver agreement, they were briefed on the tone and content to be used during the shoot, and
everyone – including Ravi, Riya, Manu laughed during the shoot. You can check the uncut
footage.

Importantly, our show is hosted exclusively on YouStream, a paid subscription platform.

Every viewer who accessed the show voluntarily paid for the content after reviewing its
trailer, theme, and content style. The subscription model clearly outlines that the show
contains adult humour, sarcasm, parody, and provocative commentary and by subscribing,
viewers acknowledge and consent to such content. It is not publicly broadcasted or accessible
to general audiences, including minors.

With respect to the episode in question, all participants, including Ravi Kumar, Riya Singh,
and Manu, were informed in writing that the format includes intense satire, roast-style
humour, and possibly personal remarks. They were briefed verbally before the shoot about
the nature of interaction between judges and contestants and they were also asked to sign a
roast show participation and content waiver agreement, which they did without any
objections.

The show’s comedic tone thrives on creating a safe space for exaggerated performances, both
by contestants and judges. The goal was never humiliation, but mutual participation in a pre
agreed, comedic narrative. Even during the episode, all contestants appeared to be in the
spirit of the performance viz. laughing, responding confidently, and engaging with the
audience.

Following the recording, we conducted our standard courtesy debrief, where we personally
checked in with the participants. All three expressed that they were absolutely fine with what
had transpired. We even apologised, as a precaution, in case any line had inadvertently been
crossed. No one expressed concern, and all gave us verbal consent to air the episode.

Once social media outrage began largely driven by short, contextless clips taken out of a
long-form, scripted performance we immediately took corrective steps:

• All episodes were taken down;

• I cancelled my upcoming stand-up special and refunded the tickets;

• We issued public clarifications and reached out to the concerned participants again.

I regret that satire was mistaken for malice. But I firmly stand by the fact that this was a
planned, consented, adult performance on a paid platform, not an act of public endangerment.

I also want to address what I said to the contestant Manu. I said, ‘Itna confidence aapko
bilkul suit nahi karta madam. Yaha tak pahuchna bhi aapke liye over achievement hai... With
looks like yours and no talent, it's a surprise you're not doing something else for attention.’
Let me first say: I regret the way it sounded. Out of context, it’s hurtful, unfair, and cruel. But
let me explain – not as excuse, but to give context. This was a parody show built on mutual
roasting, everyone on stage knew that. Contestants came in knowing that their performances,
however absurd or underwhelming, would be met with humor, sarcasm, and over-the-top
reactions. It was mock drama. We weren’t there to evaluate talent like ‘Indian Idol’ rather we
were there to satirize the obsession with judging others. Manu herself had said, ‘Main yahan
tum logon ke maze lene aayi hoon, talent prove karne nahi’. That was her script. She wasn’t
there to prove anything. She embraced the irreverence. She walked in like a boss, with
swagger and sarcasm. So my reply was in the same tone – an exaggerated, ironic pushback. It
was satire, not sexism.

And if you watch the full clip – not the viral one, you’ll see she laughed. The audience
laughed. It was mutual banter, not bullying. We were playing roles, not attacking people.

I’ve made fun of male contestants too – on their looks, overconfidence, or terrible dancing. It
has never been about gender or looks, it’s been about the spirit of mock-judgment. That’s
why the audience loved the format. Because we weren’t pretending to be high and mighty.
We were mocking the idea of being ‘judges’ itself.

DW2- Rajveer ( Podcaster)- My name is Rajveer Batliwala, aged 31 Years. I am a

podcaster and a business owner. I have been working in the digital media and entertainment
space for over 9 years now. I have hosted several shows, conducted interviews and appeared
as a guest on numerous reality tv shows. I met Mr. Sukhi Malhotra in 2020. We were both
striving to create content that was meaningful and impactful, with the shared goal of
contributing positively to society. Sukhi spoke to me about his idea for a unique platform that
would allow individuals to showcase their raw and unfiltered talent who might not otherwise
receive the opportunity to present themselves publicly. That dream later evolved into the
show Indiana’s got Blatant. However, fate had different plans, never thought this would turn
to something bad.

On 25th December 2024, I was invited as a guest judge on the comedy show ‘Indiana’s got
Blatant’, hosted and produced by Mr. Sukhi Malhotra. Before the shoot, I was informed that
the show thrives on unscripted humour, satire and spontaneous audience interactions and that
participants join willingly knowing the tone of the show. The entire show was set in a
performative space where jokes and banter form the core of the content. The show is known
for testing the wit, patience and perseverance of contestants through light-hearted mockery
and comedic challenges.

At no point was there any intent to insult, harass, demean or sexually objectify any
individual. The remarks made were in a comic spirit and within the agreed boundaries of
performance and contract, where we as judges and them as participants often engaged in
banter.

The comments made by me towards contestant Riya Singh were in response to her
performance in a segment titled “Embarrassing Moments” and were intended humorously,
not maliciously, not to defame her or anything. My intention was never to harass or insult
anyone. The nature of my comment was sarcastic and humorous and not meant to be taken
literally or personally. The audience too, responded with laughter and applause as is
customary with this kind of content.
At no point during or after the shoot did the participant express any discomfort to me directly.
In fact, she responded with wit and humour, in keeping with the show’s tone. I was surprised
to see the clips later going viral on social media, completely stripped of context, leading to
outrage. I respect the concerns of viewers who may have found some content uncomfortable
but I categorically deny having any criminal intent.

I respectfully state that I was performing a role as a guest judge on a comedy show, not
engaging in personal interaction in a private or threatening manner. All was a part of my job
as per the ingredients of the Contract.

I deeply respect all individuals and their dignity. If my words, intended in humour have hurt
anyone, I express sincere regret. However, I categorically deny that there was any intent to
harm, insult or harass anyone.

DW3- Akanksha ( Manu’s sister)- I am Akanksha Sharma, aged 27 years old. I am relative
(sister) of Manu Sharma. She had called me on 24th December 2024 that she is going to be
performing on Indiana’s got Blatant. I am a big fan of the show. I along with my friends
watch this show together and laugh our hearts out. So when Manu asked me to accompany
her, i readily agreed. The show was filmed on 25/12/2024 and I was backstage with Manu the
entire time. We could watch what was happening on stage from behind the curtains. I had a
blast there and laughed so much! When Manu’s turn came and she performed out there, I was
so impressed that my sister is going to be famous now. Manu too shared the same emotion.
She came backstage jumping with joy and said that her manifestation worked and now no one
can stop her from being famous. I hugged her. After the filming ended, we both went to have
sushi at a nearby restaurant and returned back home. When the show was aired for everyone
to watch, my phone kept constantly buzzing with messages asking me if Manu was my sister.
I took screenshots and sent them to Manu and Manu reverted back with equal amazement that
she had actually gone viral. What later happened with she filing FIR, i truly don’t understand.
After this, Manu stopped replying to my texts.

DW4- ZAID IBRAHIM ( Audience )

I am Zaid. I am 35 years old and reside in Navi Mumbai. I work as an architect in firm called
ABN Co. My boss actually while giving gifts for Christmas had given me tickets to Indiana’s
got Blatant. I actually love Sukhi Malhotra and have seen him perform live so I went on 25th
December to Habitat Centre. I honestly had a blast. Such format of the show and comic
timings to each and everyone was very similar to International Roast shows. My stomach
actually hurted that day because of constant laughing. I remember watching Manu Sharma
and Riya Singh performed and like every other contestants there were jokes that were
exchanged. Both the girls didn’t look like they were uncomfortable at all. Infact after the
show wrapped up and everyone were leaving, I met Riya Singh in the parking lot and
congratulated her and she replied to me that if I want I should take a seflie with her otherwise
once she gets famous, she might not be available. I simply smiled knowing she was on a high
after giving such performance. When the episode was out, the reactions were mixed, to be
honest. But whatever they might be, each and every person laughed while watching it. Such
are roast shows, leaving everyone happy yet thought provoking. All this mess later on is
actually another gimmick to gain attention from public, nothing else.