0% found this document useful (0 votes)
262 views15 pages

Prosecution Memorial Final UCL

This is the prosecution memorial prepared for a moot court competition which can be used as a sample for various moot courts.

Uploaded by

Areeba Rashid
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
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
262 views15 pages

Prosecution Memorial Final UCL

This is the prosecution memorial prepared for a moot court competition which can be used as a sample for various moot courts.

Uploaded by

Areeba Rashid
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/ 15

QAU Blue “P”

5th UCL National Moot Court Competition, 2017

THE STATE V. MAIRA KHAN

Memorial for Prosecution

1
Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3


Index of Authorities ........................................................................................................................ 4-5
Statement of Facts .......................................................................................................................... 6-7
Charge Framed……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7

Summing up Speech……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8-11
Witness Plan………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..12-15

2
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

 Pakistan Penal Code 1860 (“PPC”)

 Pakistan Criminal Law Journal (“P.Cr.L.J”)

 International Human Rights Law (“IHRL”)

 European Commission on Human Rights (“ECHR”)

 International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”)

 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”)

 Human Rights (“HR”)

 Battered Wife Syndrome (“BWS”)

3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Authorities Page No.

Encyclopedia Britannica 8

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, s.302 8

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 s.300 8

2005 P.Cr.L.J 182 8

Pakistan Penal Code, s.99 9

Pakistan Penal Code, s.100 9

2004 P.Cr.L.J 835 9

2011 P.Cr.L.J 213 9

PLD 1995, Quetta 83 9

Human Rights Standards for Self-defense between Private Persons 10

ECHR Article 2 10

ICCPR Article 6 10

UNHR Article 3 10

4
UNU Website 10

Post Mortem Examination Report 10&11

Inquest Report 10&11

The State v. Norman, California Trial 10

Campbell Law Review, Criminal Law 11.

5
STATEMENT OF FACTS

Maira Khan got married to Imran Tariq 6 years ago. It was an arranged marriage. Maira’s father

was an electrical engineer and used to work at a leading telecommunication company. Imran’s

father was also an electrical engineer and worked for the same company. Their fathers knew each

other but were not exactly friends. In 2007, the company bought two rival telecommunication

companies. It was a big achievement for the company, so to celebrate the success a huge dinner

was hosted at Marriot Hotel, Islamabad. All employees were invited with families. That is where

Maira met Imran for the first time. Soon after the dinner, his family approached Maira’s mother

for my hand. Initially she was reluctant as was still in her last year of university. She was doing a

Master’s in Psychology from Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad. Maira planned to work for

a leading psychologist for a year and then to do an M.Phil or PhD in domestic violence related

psychology. On the other hand Imran Tariq was a mechanical engineer and working in a multi-

national construction firm. He had completed most of his education in USA. They got married in

2008. Things were quite smooth for the first two years of marriage but odd things started

transpiring after their marriage. It was mainly due to an unfortunate incident. Maira’s father was

involved in a corruption case in the company two years ago. Tariq Hassan, father of Imran Tariq

was a member of the internal inspection unit, which is tasked to investigate and report corruption

matters to the senior management abroad. Maira’s father had repeatedly asked him to brush the

matter under the carpet but my father being an upright person did not want his personal relationship

to impact his professional duties. The internal report of the company found sufficient

incriminating material against Maira’s father and as per company policy the matter was reported

to higher management. As a result, Maira’s father was fired with immediate effect last year.

6
Needless to say, this had repercussions for the marriage of Imran and Maira, and they started

fighting a lot after this incident. Maira’s father had a heart attack last year and she blamed Tariq

Hassan for her father’s heart problem.

CHARGE FRAMED

 Whether crime committed by Maira Khan i.e. murder of her husband with vase and lemon malt

bottle makes her liable to punishment under section 302 of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860?

 If yes, to which punishment she will be liable, Qisas or Ta’zir under the circumstances of the

case and evidence provided?

7
SUMMING UP SPEECH

BACKGROUND:

On the night of 31st December, 2014, some unpleasant events gave way to the murder of deceased

Imran Tariq. It has been alleged that his wife “Maira Khan” has killed her husband a few minutes

before 12.00 on the New Year’s Eve with a vase and a lemon malt bottle. During the party for New

Year, Imran Tariq and Maira Khan had a heated argument in which Maira was shouting at Imran.

Maira was also seen shouting at waiter as well and went inside of the house. Imran also seemed

upset but didn’t voice it much. A few minutes before 12, Imran went upstairs to call Maira for

cake-cutting ceremony where he was killed by his wife. These incidents had been backed by family

feud and Maira Khan’s grudges against Imran Tariq. The reason for these grudges was insult of

Maira Khan’s father due to corruption charges against him that were inspected and reported by

Tariq Hassan, father of the deceased. Witnesses to this incident is Ismail Darugar who was at the

balcony near their room and Sibtain Hassan, and Azam Tariq.

SUBMISSIONS:

Section 302 of PPC states that whoever commits qatl-e-amd shall be liable to punishment of death

or life imprisonment as ta'zir1, if the proof in either of the forms specified in Section 304 is not

available;2

Qatl-e-amd is defined in section 300 of PPC which envisages that qatl-e-amd has two elements; i)

Mental element i.e. the intention to kill the other and ii) physical element i.e. committing some act

1
“Taʿzīr crimes (discretionary crimes); their punishment is left to the discretion of the qāḍī (judge)”. Definition by
Encyclopedia Britannica
2
Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

8
that is likely to cause death of the person in normal course of events 3. However, a judgement in

2005 says that in order of constituting of qatl-e-amd, it is not necessary that injury should be caused

in order to cause death. If someone inflicts injury in order to cause bodily injury which is likely to

cause death in normal course of events, it would be murder. Injury caused on vital parts on body

such as neck, head and pericardial region may result in causing death. 4 Even if intention needs to

be determined, it can easily be determined by the two things in this case;

i) Maira’s grudge against Imran Tariq. This grudge is evident by the testimony of Sibtain Hassan

that ever since that event, Maira had been a very different person altogether. This sudden difference

had been due to that grudge as she avoided to meet Imran’s relatives. Intention is to be gathered

from the object for which injury is being caused.5 Here object seems to get the satisfaction by

hurting Imran Tariq. The urge to gain this satisfaction might not be pre-meditated, but section 300

does not provide any exception in offence of qatl-e-amd if committed due to grave and sudden

provocation.6

ii) The object claimed by accused herself being self-defense is very weak. The weapons that had

been used to kill Imran Tariq proves the intention of Maira to kill him. Had it been only for self-

defense, one weapon was enough to defend her. She did not have to use two weapons just to defend

herself. The right of private defense in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is

necessary for the purpose of defense.7 The right to self-defense up to the extent of killing someone

can only be exercised if the death or grievous hurt is apprehended8. One of the judgement states;

“Law does not give an individual the right to go on repeating fire-arm shots on the aggressor after

3
Section 300 Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
4
2005, P.Cr.L.J 182.
5
2005, P.Cr.L.J 182.
6
PLD 1995, Quetta 83
7
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, section 99; Extent to which the right may be exercised.
8
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, section 100, (First and Second conditions). And 2013 P.Cr.L.J 835

9
he has been neutralized and then using axe blow on the deceased repeated by Lathi blows and

stones when the aggressor had been incapacitated”.9 In this case, similar circumstances can be seen

that accused that used two weapons for the purpose of defense which exceeded the need of defense

and hence the court did not grant this statement.

IHRL also establishes boundaries on domestic laws on personal self-defense. States may not

prohibit self-defense altogether, but in protecting the right to life they must also be sure that self-

defense rights do not exceed reasonable boundaries.10 Importance of Right to Life has been

emphasized by various international conventions including (ECHR)11, (ICCPR)12, and (UDHR)13.

Under international HR instruments, the assertion of the inherent right to life of every human being

is accompanied by an assertion of the legal protection of that basic human right and of

the negative obligation not to deprive arbitrarily of one's life.14

In this case, firstly the bat has never been recovered by the police from crime site that Maira has

claimed. So there was no weapon as to apprehend grievous injury or death to the accused.

Secondly, even if, owing to the psychological condition of the deceased, Imran was going to cause

her harm (with hands at most), the extent to which weapons had been used by Maira is excessive

to the principle of self-defense. Also, the fact that injury had been caused at back of the neck 15,

shows Imran was not in a position of causing grievous injury or death to Maira. Had she attacked

in self-defense, the injury caused by the attack should be at front. California trial court did not

grant the wife, who killed her husband while he was asleep, the right to self-defense as it did not

9
2011, P.Cr.L.J 213
10
Human Rights Standards for Self-Defense between Private Persons, Jan Arno Hessbruegge; published to oxford
scholarship online
11
ECHR, Article 2, Right to Life
12
ICCPR, Article 6, Right to Life
13
UDHR, Article 3, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”
14
United Nations University Website (UNU), http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu25ee/uu25ee0p.htm
15
Post Mortem Examination Report and Inquest Report

10
find sufficient danger for her to cause the death of deceased.16 Thirdly, as Ismail Darugar testified,

after shouting there was sudden voice of hitting. This shows lack of time for Imran to go and grab

the bat in between these two events.

As to the claim of BWS the defense is merely allowed on the basis of the evil nature of spouse.

BWS is a deep-rooted social and psychological problem which can be rooted out from society by

collective efforts of psychologists and legalists17, however, role of psychologists should be more

than legalists, as their job leans more towards protection of human rights. Including BWS in self-

defense would lead towards the broadening of self-defense laws which becomes a human rights

concern under IHRL.18

There is no question whether Actus Reus exists or not? It has been established by the evidence

provided in the form of Inquest Report, Post Mortem Examination Report, Serologist Report and

Forensic Report showing the injury at lower left of neck at the back which is shown to be lacerated

and incised.19 The cause of death is shown to be these injuries on head that has been caused due to

attack with some sharp object which turns out to be lemon malt bottle and broken vase after police

investigation. Hence, this shows that attack had been attempted by Maira Khan that would lead to

death of any person in the normal circumstances.20

CONCLUSION: Honorable court is requested to punish Maira with death or life imprisonment

as Ta’zir under section 302 (b) PPC in light of above arguments.

16
The State v. Norman, California Trial Court
17
Campbell Law Review, Criminal Law - Battered Woman Syndrome: The Killing of a Passive Victim - A Perfect
Defense or a Perfect Crime? - State v. Norman, Jeffrey M. Cutler
18
Supra note 9.
19
11, Inquest Report, of Investigation Officer Kaleemullah
20
Comment of Post Mortem Report.

11
WITNESS PLAN

Ismail Darugar as Prosecution Witness:

Ismail Darugar is an important witness for this case as he was the only one who was nearest to the

crime scene and could hear what has been happening in the room between Maira Khan and Imran

Tariq. Ismail Darugar’s testimony as Prosecution Witness is important in weakening Maira’s

statement. His version of events, if accepted truth, would undermine Maira’s claim of self-defense.

Also, since Ismail Darugar has been a good friend of Imran Tariq, his statement can help in

establishing Imran’s character as husband as far as he knows Imran in an objective manner.

Moreover, Ismail Darugar’s testimony has the most weight in this case as he cannot be claimed to

be an interested witness unlike other witnesses who are related by blood with the deceased.

Theory of the Case:

Maira had been suffering from battered women syndrome in which it is likely that woman starts

fearing her husband or aggressor more than he causes actual harm. Statements that had been spoken

by Imran Tariq such as “you just want to spoil my party—you always do this---you are mentally

sick—even your doctor has failed to cure you” at that incident seems to be normal when he was

angry and already had a fight with Maira downstairs. Statements of these kinds spilled out in anger

does not show any motive to kill or grievously hurt the other. Same must have happened there but

Maira over reacted and attempted to kill her husband. Maira gave the statement that downstairs

Imran started quarrelling first and that she showed calmness on arrival of waiter. However,

according to the testimony of other witnesses (Azam Tariq and Sibtain Hassan), Maira shouted at

that waiter. However, calmness has been shown by Imran Tariq even after that heated argument

when he seemed upset but did not voice it and was seen mostly hanging around with friends.

12
How this Witness Fits into my Theory of the Case?

Testimony of Ismail Darugar would undermine the statement of accused that she had been acting

in self-defense. Ismail Darugar being a neutral observer there can tell whether Imran Tariq’s voices

were so fearful as to grievously hurt or cause death of Maira Khan that she had to react so fiercely

as to cause his death. So Darugar’s testimony would help in establishing the intention of Maira of

this murder and to prove the mensrea of this case.

What does Counsel Intend to Prove?


The counsel intends to prove the following at the end of the testimony;

1) Imran’s attitude at that time was not as fiercely so as to cause death or grievous harm to the

accused.

2) Proving that Maira’s statement was exaggerated in telling that Imran wanted to kill him.

3) Maira’s pre-meditated intention to kill Imran evident from the statement “I want to end it” and

then sudden scream of Imran “Oh my God” followed by silence.

4) Proving Maira’s claim of self-defense a weak one as there was too little time for deceased to

go and grab the bat between the arguments and killing. After what Imran said to Maira, she too

suddenly reacted by saying “I want to end it” to give time to Imran to go and grab a bat in order

to hurt her.

Maira Khan as Defense Witness:


Maira’s cross-examination as defense witness is important as Maira is the only one who knows

the exact situation as there are no eye-witnesses so Maira would have to be cross-examined despite

the protection given to her by the State as accused.

Aim of Prosecution Counsel from Maira’s Cross-Examination:

13
1) Prosecution wants to point out the fallacies in Maira Khan’s statement. The statements of Sibtain

Hassan and Azam Tariq are contradicting Maira Khan’s statement when Azam Tariq and Sibtain

Hassan said that Maira was shouting at the waiter while Maira said that she was relieved at the

arrival of waiter. Prosecution wants Maira to answer this question.

2) Also, Sibtain Hassan testified that Maira’s attitude had been totally different after what has

happened to her father in those unfortunate circumstances as has been mentioned in the facts.

While Maira claims that it was Imran’s attitude towards her migraine attack that lead to quarrel,

what Sibtain Hassan witnessed was totally different. He saw that Maira was upset that Imran’s

father “Tariq” was not willing to invite her father personally and she has been constantly

pointing towards him. He also testified that Imran took the initiative and invited Maira’s father.

During all this scenario, Imran’s attitude was seen very calm and controlled despite being upset

due to Maira’s behavior in the party in front of everyone. Prosecution wants the truth of this

contradiction from Maira.

3) Then another thing need to be asked from Maira to prove the contradiction within her statement

is that she said to Imran that she’ll be downstairs before the cake-cutting ceremony. However,

what was seen was different. She wasn’t there by herself and Imran had to go and see why she

wasn’t down already by the time.

What Prosecution wants to conclude?

1) These contradictions in Maira’s statements show that Maira’s testimony is very weak and court

cannot rely upon her testimony as has been shown from collected evidence too. (No bat has been

recovered as claimed by Maira).

2) These fallacies and contradictions would render the claim of her self-defense very weak as her

overall statement would be undermined.

14
3) Extracting the fact from Maira herself about her being upset due to refusal of Tariq Hassan to

invite her father to the party, would prove that series of events would lead towards Maira’s

intention to kill Imran Tariq. That series of events include, Maira being upset which leads to

heated argument between Imran and herself. That argument leading her to go upstairs and

preparing her mind to kill Imran Hassan. Her statement in argument there “I want to end this”

depicts that preparation and she then ultimately attempts to kill her to its success.

Hence, all the criterion of convicting Maira would then be fulfilled i.e. Mensrea and Actus Reus.

Maira’s cross-examination would assist the prosecution in proving this charge.

15

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy