Coming together is a beginning,

keeping together is progress;

Working together is a success.

-Edward Everett Hale

The moment of adrenaline rush has come when the teams are on their toes to do what they prepared for months. The tradition of brilliance continues with the 28 teams from across the country finally making it to the oral rounds. The atmospheric aura is so professional in the premises of the Law College Dehradun giving everyone a feeling of flying without the plane. The moot problem is not only constitutionally sound but is historically rich in dealing with the different nuances of federal structures across the world. The tussle between individual interest and state interest regarding the Hijab issue depicts its impact on the Union formed for the interest of the people; the same can all be seen from the fact that one of the states demanded the Right to secession.

Fasten your seat belts and Mark the dates: 24th February to 26th February 2023

 

DAY-1 [ 24^TH FEBRUARY, 2023]

3:00 pm: Launch of the 7th edition of the National Moot Court Competition commenced with the intriguing Training Session of SCC Online conducted by Mr. Rajesh Raina, Deputy Manager, SCC Online, providing law students with a thorough explanation of the database search tools and strategies to access the e-resource.

3:30 pm: The researcher test commenced where the researchers showcased their legal acumen, carrying a different sort of enthusiasm within them.

4:00 pm: The teams were made familiar with the rules and regulations of the competition, describing the round scoring, dress codes, dos and don’ts, and the format of each round. Further, explaining the assistance of team representatives throughout the event and court masters in the courtrooms. Without any further ado, Memorial Exchange took place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5:00 pm: With the commencement of the Inaugural Ceremony, the much-awaited moment had come when the President formally declared the event open. The teams were highly motivated by the address of the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, and Dean of the college. Though the day was very tiresome for both the teams and the organizing committee, the day was concluded on a positive because of a sense of achievement within everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DAY-2[ 25^TH FEBRUARY, 2023]

With a new day, we welcome our teams for the oral rounds!

9:00 am: The judge’s briefing took place where they were given an overview of the competition, Marking Scheme, Moot Problem and issues raised in the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.00 am: The preliminary rounds started, and the teams filled with enthusiasm confidently displayed their arguments. The participants flawlessly presented their arguments which was the repository of their months of hard work and dedication. An even battle for what’s right was evident in the rebuttals and sur-rebuttals

12:00 pm: The Preliminary Round-1 was concluded in time and participants had an hour break before proceeding with Preliminary Round-2.

1:00 pm: With the grilling of Prelim-1 at the back of the mind participants proceeded with a stronger sense of competitiveness in Prelim-2. Teams were nervous as well as excited and were tested on their knowledge of the basic concepts of law.

03:00 pm: The Preliminary Rounds have ended, and now is time for the results. Now based on merit 16 teams would compete to make it to Quarter Finals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

03:30 pm: The Draw of Lots for Quarter Finals was duly conducted meanwhile the teams prayed their best to get their strong side.

05:00 pm: With every room full of quality future prosecutors, the Quarter Finals Rounds were worth witnessing. The judges were throwing the questions with the speed of light testing not only the legal knowledge but also the temperament of the participants.

6:20 pm: Then in most of the courtrooms comes the time of counter-attacking which is rebuttal rounds where every participant depicted their analytical and critical interpretation of each other’s arguments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7:00 pm: As the severity of rounds is increasing, the heart of participants is skipping the beats. Finally, the result was declared while the 8 teams got disheartened the other 8 teams stepped ahead in this journey.

We wish the teams luck for the Semi-Finals and Finals!

 

DAY-3 [ 26^TH FEBRUARY, 2023]

“The Ratio of We’s to I’s is the best Indicator of the Development of a Team”

– Lewis B. Ergen

Finally, Day 3 arrived filled with excitement and Zeal, the Teams who have put in their backbreaking efforts are just 1 step away from the Finals. 2 Courtrooms and 4 teams facing each other with a sense of determination. The problem isn’t easy, the crux of the matter involves the insistence of certain educational institutions that no girl student shall wear hijab (headscarf) in the classroom, there were endless agitations that restrained all the students regardless of their religion or faith from wearing hijab within the classroom until further orders.

8:00 am: The semi-finals started in Courtroom 1 and Courtroom 2 with a Bench of 3 judges in Each. The atmosphere was intense and competitive as participants battled for a place in the finals. The teams were full of enthusiasm and the research of each team was meritorious. The speakers articulated their facts and laws.

8:30 am: The panel of eminent judges questions the counsels on Article 19(1)(a) grounds and their implementation in the case. The counsels present the reference to several landmark cases Shayara Bano v. Union of India, where all the aspects of the doctrine of essential religious practice were discussed.

9:20 am: The discussion on Moot Problem ranged from current issues like whether wearing Hijab is an essential religious practice or not, whether allowing any state to secede from India is violating the basic structure doctrine or not, and President’s Rule during the Emergency. While the arguments of petitioners were backed by the judgment of Keshavananda Bharati v. U.O.I; where the court held that any amendment in the basic structure of the constitution is invalid. The core of Respondent’s contention was the Principle of Self-determination which can be achieved through seeking independence, autonomy, or self-rule of groups of people so that their human rights are secure.

9:30 am: This is the time when rebuttal started in most of the courtrooms nullifying the shreds of evidence presented by the counsels of the opposite parties. It was invaluable to experience the experienced.

10:00 am: As they say the end is the new beginning, the end of the proceedings of the courtroom with the seal by the respected President of the Moot Court Society has led to the beginning of the final judgment chapter, the Final Rounds. The results are out and the Moot Court Room is all set to witness the two teams who made it through these 3 days.

 

 

FINAL ROUND

11:00 am: The time everyone was desperately waiting for has come! The arguments that were getting refined in every round are going to be pleaded in this courtroom. The Petitioner side has started pleading with speaker-1 trying his level best to convince the judges that come to Hijab is an essential religious practice of Islam.

11:10 am: The speaker is finding it quite difficult to persuade judges how wearing a hijab is not falling under the restriction of Article-19 (a). He is seeking refuge under the umbrella of article 25 of the constitution and demonstrated not only essential religious practice but also its engagement with constitutional values. Much of the petitioner’s argument was challenged after the bench stated that the “Holy Quran” does not mandate the wearing of hijab or headgear for Muslim women.

11: 20 am: After making it through the intense grilling session of the Bench, the council has proceeded with issue-2 of the Problem, which says that if the constitution says that a state is a union of states, can states secede from it? The Counsel constantly emphasizes that the amendment that is giving the states the Right to Secede against the integrity and unity of India.

11: 35 am: Counsel-2 started pleading to persuade the court how President’s rule under Article-356  is unconstitutional in the instant matter at hand. The counsel pleaded that before President’s Rule, there were no protests meaning thereby, neither there was a situation of failure of the Constitutional machinery in the state secondly, a chance was given to the Governor to explore all possible alternatives, and lastly, the essential guidelines laid down in the S.R. Bommai case were not followed in the instant case.

11:50 am: The counsel moved to the last issue which says whether a state has the power to secede or not and the counsel brilliantly explained that the power to cede a part of the national territory is an essential attribute of sovereignty and is not strictly prohibited in the Constitution.

12:00 pm: The court has now begun with the Respondent’s pleading. The counsel-1 of Respondent emphasizing an extreme argument that the students should be free to choose their attire in the school individually if countenanced would only breed indiscipline that may eventually degenerate into chaos in the campus and It is too far-fetched to argue that the school dress code militates against the fundamental freedoms guaranteed under Articles, 14, 15, 19, 21 & 25 of the Constitution.

12:15 pm: Roscoe Pound’s social engineering is being intensively discussed in the light of balancing the interest of the state and the individual. Where on one side the Right to Privacy and making choices is being infringed and on another side, the Right to equal treatment is being questioned.

12: 20 pm: The counsel has begun with another issue of the federal structure of the constitution. Giving a brief history of the Texas v. White case, the counsel emphasized how Indiana has adopted the Canadian model of the federal structure that the state cannot secede, and the center is comparatively stronger than the state.

12: 30 pm: Counsel-2 began with pleading and diligently persuading the court how the Hijab Pro has led to public disorder in the state further leading to the failure of the constitutional machinery. Emphasizing that the matter for which the emergency was declared, cannot by any stretch of the imagination be held to be mala-fide or clear-cut abuse of power. The emergency was imposed only after the ruling coalition government broke.

12: 50 pm: The counsel after being questioned again and again on the basic structure doctrine as started with the issue-4, where he was pleading that the Power to secede should be given to states, was palpitating to justify the same. The Constitutional Assembly is the repository of the vision of the Constituent Assembly of a unified Indiana but with his witty arguments, he made the point to satisfy the bench.

1:00 pm: Finally, the hustle has come to an end and after witnessing the whole proceeding we must say that it has become really hard for the judges to decide which team shall have a neck-to-neck competition of the quality arguments between both sides.

Wishing both the teams luck for the Results!

VALEDICTORY CEREMONY

2:15 pm: Trust the Process! That’s what we would say to the teams who have come this far. The moment a team decides to participate in a competition they have already won because they overcame the fear of doubting their capabilities. We feel humbled and express our gratitude to our Chief guest, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Judge, High Court, Uttarakhand, guest of honors, Mr. Pradeep Pant, District and Sessions Judge, Dehradun, Mr. SB Upadhyay, Senior Advocate Supreme Court of India, Ms. Nandini Gore, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, Shri Jitendra Joshi, Chancellor, Uttaranchal University, Dr. Satbir Singh Sehgal, Vice- President, Uttaranchal University.

2: 30 pm: The dignitaries were introduced by the Prof. (Dr.) Rajesh Bahuguna, Pro- Vice Chancellor, Uttaranchal University, Dean, Law College Dehradun. All the Participants were highly motivated by the speech presented by the dignitaries as they see their role models in them.

3:00 pm: Finally, the results were declared. The results are as follow:

Winners: Army Institute of Law, Mohali

Runner Up: Rajiv Gandhi National Law University

Best Oralist Male: Pranjal Mishra, SOA, National Institute of Law, Bhuvneshwar, Odisha

Best Oralist Female: Akshita Shandil, Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law

Best Researcher: Deepti Yadav, Banaras Hindu University

Best Memorial: Amity Law School, Rajasthan

3:10 pm: The event was successfully concluded by the vote of thanks of the Prof. (Dr.) Poonam Rawat, Head, Law College Dehradun.

We Look Forward to host you in the next edition!