Live Blogging

Welcome to the 1st International Cyber Law Moot Court Competition being organized by National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi (NUSRL) in association with Cyberlaw University and EBC-SCC Online as Knowledge Partners. The moot is scheduled for 10th February, 2022 to 12th February, 2022.

The NUSRL International Cyber Law Moot Court Competition aims to foster and cultivate interest in the field of cyber law and the role of information technologies in societies around the world. The NUSRL International Cyber Law Moot Court Competition challenges students to engage in comparative research of legal standards at the national and regional levels, and to develop their arguments (in written and oral forms) on cutting-edge questions in cyber law.

A brief itinerary of the 1st edition of the Moot is produced below:

Day 1: 10th February, 2022

Inauguration Ceremony : 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.

Researcher Test and Judges Briefing: 11:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Preliminary Round 1: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Preliminary Round 2: 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Day 2: 11th February, 2022

Quarter-Finals: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Semi-Finals: 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.

Day 3: 12th February, 2022

Finals: 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Valedictory Ceremony: 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Inauguration Ceremony

10:00 a.m – The first International Cyber Law Moot Court Competition, 2022 has commenced. The inauguration ceremony begins in the virtual presence of the esteemed guests, Dr. Pavan Duggal, Honorary Chancellor, Cyberlaw University, HMJ (Retd.) Manju Goel, Former Judge, High Court of Delhi, Prof. Dr. Kesava Rao Vurrakulla, Honourable Vice-Chancellor of NUSRL, Ranchi, and participants along with the Moot Court Committee of NUSRL, Ranchi, and the members of the Cyberlaw University.

10:04 a.m – The inauguration begins with a warm welcome and an introduction to the University. The event moves on to the introductions of the valued guests of the event.

10:08 a.m – Dr. Pavan Duggal addresses the audience and discusses the importance of conducting an international cyber law moot court competition. As rightly pointed out by him, the internet has become a crucial part of our life and so have cyber laws.

10:17 a.m – Dr. Kesava Rao, then proceeds to grace the participants with some mooting wisdom. The excitement is palpable in the virtual meet. There is substantial light shed on the process of preparation for a moot. “Moot competition is not for winning or losing, the proper way of perceiving a moot is that it gives an opportunity to observe.” He boosts up the confidence of the participants with his words of wisdom, making them realize that this moot is not a competition of winning or losing but a chance to prepare themselves for the future.

10:25 a.m – HMJ (Retd.) Manju Goel takes the stage to interact with the audience. She provides the audience with some courtroom wisdom. The former Judge continues to narrate some courtroom instances in order to show that some things can be learned only when they are practiced in real-time. Justice Goel focuses on how a Moot Court Competition prepares one for situations that no textbook can teach. She emphasizes the importance of Courtcraft. Her words once again remind the students that it is not the accuracy of an argument alone that takes you to success, but also the manner in which it is presented. HMJ (Retd.) Manju Goel thanked EBC-SCC Online for their contributions in the moot court competition in the capacity of knowledge partners

10:33 a.m – The inauguration continues with Prof. Dr. Christoph Stuckelberger gracing the audience. Dr. Cristoph is the President and Founder of Globethics.net Foundation Executive Director at Geneva Agape Foundation. The audience and the host thanked the esteemed guest, who, owing to the time difference, joined us early in the morning. He then provides a historical perspective to the discussion of cyber law and cyber ethics in general.

“You cannot have a law without saying what is the rules.” He asserts how it is laws that create a ground for the validity of the norms that exist.

With an example of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, he spells out the importance of cyberspace. Dr. Christoph, through his words, raised significant questions in the minds of the budding lawyers as to what goals does cyberspace fulfill and how it holds importance in the changing times. He further remarks on the ownership of cyberspace and explains how cyberspace is not owned by anyone but how collective responsibility can be used to protect and cherish cyberspace which is a world without borders. International conventions and agreements play a role in international consensus regarding the governance of cyberspace. He moves on to explain who can economically gain and lose in cyberspace. In the light of common good, enterprises need to make cyberspace accessible to consumers whilst also consuming a regulated and sustainable amount of profit.

10:48 a.m – Dr. Christoph’s words were instrumental in providing an insight into cyber ethics.

The addresses by the esteemed guests are followed by the vote of thanks, presented by Ms. Priya Vijay, Faculty Convenor, Moot Court Committee, NUSRL, Ranchi. She mentions the key highlights of the guests’ speeches. The participants were wished the best for their Moot Court Competition.

Dr. Duggal then proceeds to spring a surprise on the moot teams and explains that the Winning Team, the First Runners up, the Best Speaker Male and Female along with the Best Memorial Team will receive access to paid courses offered by the Cyberlaw University as a reward. This would be in addition to the prizes already announced by NUSRL, Ranchi.

10:55 a.m – The spirits of the participants are boosted and yet they seem calm after the condensed fluidic addresses of the eminent guests and speakers. The inauguration concludes with wishing the participants well and briefing them about the timeline. With this, the beginning of a long day sums up, while the researchers are gearing up for the researchers’ test to showcase their skills for the title of the Best Researcher.

Preliminary Rounds – I

The wait is finally over. The preliminary round begins!!!!

Court Room 1: Petitioner TC 1 v. Respondent TC 21

12:00 p.m – The courtroom shall proceed ex-parte as the respondents are not present. The petitioner has joined the courtroom and is confident yet anxious about the proceedings. The participants greet the bench. The stage is set!!! The petitioner counsel 1 begins with their introduction and arguments. The speaker seems confident while briefing the judges about the facts of the case. The speaker is careful with the words and is emphasizing points of the facts that are crucial.

12:10 p.m  – And so begins the arguments!! The counsel has no trace of anxiousness and is addressing the bench with the sub-issues. The speaker started strong and is clearing the bench’s doubts. The bench’s questions have made the counsel a bit hesitant, but he continues with the case with his brilliant advocacy. Indeed the words of HMJ Goel had a clear impact on the team.

12:20 p.m – The counsel continues with the arguments, simultaneously mentioning Articles of The Constitution that is pertinent to the case. The bench is questioning speaker 1 on the intricacies of the case. The judge also asks the counsel to clarify the right to the internet and cryptocurrency. The speaker is trying his level best to convince the judges, but the professionalism of the bench leaves all of us in confusion of to what extent have they been pursued.

12:24 p.m – The question of the bench with regard to Article 19 has got the speaker on pins and needles. The judges have made the speaker confused by showing that the petition is wasting the time of the court. But the speaker is yet to prove himself, he accepts the bench’s queries and tries to answer them. 

12:30 p.m –  The bench through its interrogation has made a crack in the speaker’s confidence. Yet the speaker continues with a smile on his face, facing the questions and answering them by citing relevant case laws and facts of the moot problem.

The judges have raised questions to the speaker about how the right to the internet is crucial to one’s life. The courtroom has gained pace and the judges have made the team go cold feet. The bench asked the speaker about the validity of the special leave petition and the grounds on which it questions the decision of the Honorable High Court. 

12:37 p.m- Without wasting any time beating around the bush, the speaker 2 takes forth the proceeding, to address the bench on the final issue raised in the case. The speaker continues with zeal to make the bench adjudicate in their favor. The hard work that the counsel put in the research can be seen by how they state laws, cases and use them in their favor. The speaker focuses on the relevant sections of CrPC and highlights rights that the petitioner holds.

12:41 p.m- With no questions asked, the speaker 2 moves to the prayer. But alas!! The bench asks the speaker questions regarding differences between specific provisions and to explain the suspension of the constitution. The speaker tries to maintain their calm and provide solutions to the queries raised. 

The bench further puts up a question to examine how much clarity does the speaker hold on the facts of the case. The questions of the bench about the facts of the case have made the counsel conscious, choosing every word they say before the court carefully. The precision with which the judge focuses on the moot problem has made the team doubtful about their arguments. 

12:51 p.m- The bench, through its arduous interrogation, has confused the counsel and made her a little nervous. Speaker 2 states case laws that may answer the confusing questions of the bench. 

The counsel continues with answering the question of how the ban on the internet is unreasonable. The speaker looks dazed but tries not to  show it on her face. The debate going between the judge and the speaker has everyone at the edge of their seat.

12:57 p.m- The courtroom is informed about the end of the time duration allotted to the counsel and with this the proceedings come to a rest. The team, though exhausted by the questions, still looks energetic as ever. Whereas the judges effortlessly appear neutral. The counsel thanks the bench.. With this the first preliminary round comes to an end. The result stands much awaited. 

Court Room 2:  Petitioner TC 2 v. Respondent TC 22

12:03 p.m- All the participants and the judges have arrived. The formalities preceding the court proceedings have commenced and the participants on both sides have been asked about their preferred time divisions by the court official. The proceedings begin! The Counsel on the petitioner’s side commences with their opening statement.

12:11 p.m- The bench enquires the grounds of the counsel’s argument. It substantiates their question on the argument by the counsel and the counsel, effortlessly defends their stand. The court has started to take its stereotypical serious shape.

12:14 p.m- The counsel elaborates her answer by quoting relevant statutory provisions and skims through relevant case laws to reinforce the same. 

12:15 p.m-  The ladyship corners the counsel with cross-questions and she resorts to demanding for a further time during the proceeding to answer her technical question. 

12:18 p.m- The counsel begins with her second issue and in the pursuit to convince the bench, storms the courtroom with analogies, authorities, and relevant corollaries.

12:21 p.m- The counsel, gliding effortlessly through her arguments, has been presented by a speed bump by the bench by questioning the relevance of the cited authority.  

12:23 p.m-  The counsel is concluding her argument as directed by the bench due to the exhaustion of her allotted time. Here, counsel 2 starts with the next issue.

12:25 p.m- Here comes a cross-examination of the counsel by the bench regarding a term quoted by her. The counsel seems to be well versed with her case.

12:28 p.m- The bench questions the understanding of the counsel about one of the cited authorities. The counsel seems to have been taken off guard by this question. Again, due to the humility of the bench, it deals with the issue softly and allows the counsel to move ahead.

12:34 p.m- The learned bench is surely giving the counsel a hard time. They are anything but easily convinced!

12:36 p.m- Here comes the conclusion of the arguments by the petitioner’s side. The prayer has been made by the counsel and therefore, the petitioner’s case is duly rested.

12:39 p.m- Now it is the turn of the respondent’s counsel to steal the courtroom drama. The first counsel humbly puts forward her issues before the learned bench and makes her contentions.

12:42 p.m- Answering the bench’s questions with convincing analogies, the counsel exploits her knowledge of the law to defend her client. Alas, that is not enough to overwhelm the intellect and confidence of the bench. A troublesome cross-question by the bench surely ruffles the feathers of the counsel!

12:45 p.m- The confidence on the counsel’s part trembles a little since the bench, not only being left unconvinced by the counsel’s previous argument but also shooting her with even more daunting questions. 

12:48 p.m- Tension builds up as the bench roots for its answers and the counsel starts to seem to be under pressure. Lack of cited authorities seems to be troublesome for the counsel!

12:52 p.m- Given a go-ahead by the bench, the counsel furthers with her arguments, nearing the end of her allotted time.

12:55 p.m- Seems the troubles have not ended for the counsel as she again gets cornered by the bench.

1:02 p.m- The counsel concludes her arguments and the second counsel starts her submissions before the court. She has been granted the permission to go ahead with her arguments.

1:06 p.m- Overwhelmed by the backlog of unanswered questions  by the bench, the counsel pleads ignorance and furthers with the permission of the bench. Thirty seconds of speaking and again, the counsel gets countered by the bench. This certainly is a very challenging situation for the counsel.

1:15 p.m: The final conclusion of the respondent’s arguments commence and the prayer has been made before the bench.

Court Room 3: Petitioner TC 3 v. Respondent TC 23

12:04 p.m- All the participants have joined in. Participants are being made aware of the rules. 

12:12 p.m-  The court is now in session. Get ready for an exciting courtroom session!   The first counsel on behalf of the petitioner begins with sheer confidence in her voice. The judge is being briefed with the facts. The first counsel proceeds with her arguments. The first counsel refers to various judgments explaining how the freedom of expression is being violated. The ladyship asks questions and the counsel for the petitioner tries to convince the bench with her arguments . 

12:22 p.m- The counsel proceeds with her second submission. Moving forward confidently with her arguments, the petitioner seems confused regarding some points. Petitioner seeks permission to move to 3rd submission but the ladyship has some questions.  The counsel was able to convince the bench. 2 mins left for Counsel No. 1. Let’s see if she can use the time left in her best interest. Counsel 1 gets done with her part of arguments.

12:34 p.m- Counsel 2 starts after taking the permission of Hon’ble bench. While addressing the second and third issues, the counsel seemed confident. The ladyship inquired the counsel on some aspects of the issue which made the counsel perplexed.

12:41 p.m- Convincing the bench, the petitioner moves ahead with the third issue. Stating various statutes and legislations, the counsel is determined to leave an ever-lasting impression on the bench. The bench directs the counsel to speed up. The counsel proceeds with the prayer.

12:51 p.m- The first counsel on behalf of the Respondent starts with his arguments after taking permission of Hon’ble bench. Looks like there is some confusion. The second counsel initiated his arguments. Cross questioning of the bench is giving a tough time to the counsel. The bench doesn’t seem to be convinced. The counsel is fumbling while answering the question.

12:57 p.m- After answering a series of questions, the bench looks a little convinced. Counsel seeks permission to move ahead with the second issue.  The ladyship inquires the counsel about basic terms mentioned in the problem. The counsel seems to be unnerved with back to back questions. 

1:15 p.m- The counsel proceeds with her notion on further issues. And look! The counsel comes up with something that brings a smile in the face of judges! Judges seem convinced. The counsel moves ahead with the prayer, requesting the Hon’ble court to pass the desired orders. The petitioner seeks permission for rebuttals. The Permission for which was granted. The counsel starts with great aplomb stating that how the justice should be delivered to them. The respondents put forth sur-rebuttals. 

1:25 p.m- The proceedings have concluded and the counsels are allowed to leave the courtroom.

Court Room 4: Petitioner TC 5 Vs. Respondent TC 26

12:16 p.m- The petitioner starts to provide a brief consideration of facts for the enrichment of the bench. 

12:22 p.m- The first speaker of the petitioner then proceeds to provides to provide the issues that the court has to deal with. 

12:23 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner begins his arguments with a sense of confidence in his speech. 

12:27 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner has raised the pitch along with his speed of oration whilst giving his submissions. The change of pace is visible considering the submissions need to be submitted as soon as he can. He has provided his arguments with a lot of case laws indicative that his arguments are adequately backed by law on his side.

12:31 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner has concluded his arguments although he seemed dazed and confused at the end which might indicate jitters.

12:33 p.m- The second counsel of the petitioner has commenced with her arguments and has provided a structure to the judges present in the beginning indicating a structured and composed argument. The counsel seems calm and is comfortable with her moderate pace. Emphasis is put on certain laws and international treaties to show how the defendant violates such fundamental areas of law.

12:40 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner has further slowed down the pace of her submissions contrary to the first counsel. The bench has now asked the counsel a pertinent question about the arguments put forward and which the counsel is confident to answer.

12:44 p.m- The bench has now asked a question in relation to the case laws used by the petitioner in her arguments, the bench has asked the counsel’s opinion of the same.

12:46 p.m- The bench has moved on to grilling the counsel of the petitioner and the counsel seems to be moving brilliantly in handling the question showing composure and ability to handle the question.

12:50 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner in answering the queries of the bench has hit some hard-hitting words to qualm the questions of the bench.

12:51 p.m- The counsel of the petitioner has concluded their arguments and commenced the prayer and ended the same in a minute.

12:53 p.m- The counsel of the respondent has started to commence his arguments. The attack has been brought from the beginning itself and the tension is palpable. The counsel of the respondent is moving at a racing pace and has used phrases spoken by eminent legal jurists to show that the arguments are well researched and well versed in the law.

12:57 p.m- The body language seems promising and the use of hand gestures are very helpful to show a well-established argument.

1:02 p.m- The second counsel of the petitioner has started her side of the argument. An urgency is visible from the side of the petitioner. 

1:07 p.m- The respondent in her pace has fumbled quite a few times now but is still able to move on with her arguments. The respondent provides some kudos to the petitioner showing to the bench certain parts of the law which the respondent will seek to change the perspective.

1:10 p.m- The bench intervenes with the argument of the respondent for an important clarification in their arguments. The bench seems confused and elaborates that the clarification given by the side of the respondent is not satisfying the bench at all.

1:15 p.m- the co-counsel of the respondent intervenes with a valid hypothetical argument that seemingly satisfies the bench.

1:16 p.m- The counsel starts to proceed with the next issue and starts to provide a general knowledge lesson to the bench which seems disconnected with the argument.

1:22 p.m- The bench has put forward a question that seeks to change the very essence of the argument of the respondent and the court has reached a fever pitch. The respondent seems dazed in her answer which is seemingly not pleasing the bench.

1:23 p.m- The co-counsel has again intervened but now the co-counsel is also not able to save the arguments of the respondent as he was before.

1:27 p.m- The counsel of the respondent has ended the prayers and the rebuttal round begins with a boxing day pace. The counsel of the petitioner has put forward a very long and dizzying question that is indistinguishable from boosting his side or asking a valid question pertaining to the argument of the respondent.

1:33 p.m- The bench has stopped the counsel of the petitioner from proceeding any further and has asked him some very important question in relation to the moot.

The counsel of the petitioner has is stuttering and seems unsure of his perspective in view of the arguments.

1:39 p.m- The counsel of the respondent has started to answer the questions put forward by the counsel of the petitioner and has started to contradict the side of the petitioner with stride albeit the Co-counsel of the respondent does seem to repeat some points.

1:41 p.m- The other co-counsel has taken over his teammate and aims to expand on the argument of his co-counsel. The co- counsel took a significant 2 seconds to restructure his answer to the needs of the question and has done is job in helping the the answer.

1:46 p.m- The arguments are over and the bench proceeds to provide a feedback to all who is present as a way to help them learn from their mistakes and make better decisions in the future. The bench commended the teams for their enthusiasm and their passionate arguments.

Court Room 5: Petitioner TC 6 v. Respondent TC 27

12:05 p.m- All the participants have arrived. The sheer enthusiasm and nervousness can clearly be seen on their faces. 

12:10 p.m- Everyone awaits the arrival of the judges.

12:19 p.m- The participants have been informed that the judge will join shortly. It seems that with every passing minute, the anxiety of participants is increasing. 

12:21 p.m- The Hon’ble judge has arrived! 

12:26 p.m- “Competition is always a good thing. It forces us to do our best. A monopoly renders people complacent and satisfied with mediocrity.” Keeping these words of Nancy Pearcy in mind, the competition begins!

12:30 p.m- The proceedings have commenced and the Counsel of the Petitioner starts presenting the facts of the case as well as the submissions. 

12:34 p.m- The Hon’ble judge asks its first question of the competition! The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner has taken the bull by its horns and is diligently answering the question. 

12:38 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench is grilling the Counsel with continuous and seemingly confusing questions. The Counsel seems to grapple with the attack but it is clear that the grilling has not shaken their confidence! The second judge has arrived as well.

12:42 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner continues with their submissions. The confidence of the Counsel has been shaken by the tough questions put forward by the Bench. 

12:48 p.m- The ball is now in the Co-counsel’s court. They proceed with their arguments with great confidence and enthusiasm with the permission of the Bench. 

12:53 p.m- The Co-counsel continues with unshaken confidence and faith. The Bench starts questioning and the Co-counsel answers them in the same bold tone and continues with their submissions. They seem very thorough with their points. 

01:00 p.m- The Co-counsel faces the wrath of a poor network connection! Luckily, the connection was restored soon and the Bench asked the Co-counsel to summarize their arguments before asking a few questions. 

01:05 p.m- It is now the turn of the Counsel on behalf of the Respondent to proceed. Their tone and speed make it evident that they are quite nervous. After all, it is such a stressful situation!

01:09 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench politely intervenes with certain questions. This adds to the stress and anxiety of the Counsel for the Respondent and they do not seem so well-versed with their arguments. 

01:17 p.m- The Bench bombards the Counsel with another set of questions. The Counsel struggles to respond properly. The demeanor of the Counsel for the Respondent evidently shows their mental exhaustion. 

01:24 p.m- The Counsel summarizes their submissions and now it is the duty of the Co-counsel to bring some action to the proceedings!

01:26 p.m- The Co-counsel begins presenting their arguments and has filled the Courtroom with some energy again! However, the Bench soon questions the validity of their arguments in reference to the present case which takes the Co-counsel by surprise.

01:32 p.m- The Co-counsel has been taken aback by the twisted questions put forward by the Hon’ble Bench. The struggle of a Moot Court is real! 

01:35 p.m- The Bench seems doubtful of a case cited by the Respondent. 

01:36 p.m- The Co-counsel for the Petitioner starts with the re-buttal with great conviction and very enthusiastically presents their questions for the Counsel of the Respondent to respond which they answer quite vehemently. 

01:40 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench provides feedback to the participants. They motivate the participants and provide generous comments. The Bench is quite impressed by the presentation of the Counsels for the Petitioner.

Court Room 6: Petitioner TC 7 v. Respondent TC 29

12:07 p.m– The judges have arrived along with the respondents but the petitioners are nowhere to be seen. Everyone waits for the petitioners to join. 

12:15 p.m– The bench inquires for the whereabouts of the petitioners and asks about the rules for penalty for joining late. 

12:20 p.m– The court master tries to contact the team and gets a message that they would join shortly. The courtroom seems to be in havoc of whether they should wait or not, the question still persists about the petitioners joining. It is notified that team 7 is having technical issues on their part so there will be no penalties. 

12:30 p.m- The bench asks for ex-parte! The discussions are going on. Yes, they are going for an ex-parte hearing. There would be no rebuttals. The counsel 1 &2 would speak now for 15 minutes each.

12:40 p.m – As counsel 1 proceeds, he is interrupted by the bench as he mentions a case that was not mentioned in the memorial. The bench allows him to mention the case but it won’t be taken into consideration.

12:50 p.mThe bench remarks all his arguments as mere allegations. Then, the second counsel proceeds with his arguments. The bench prohibits the counsel to argue on maintainability as it was already taken up with the first counsel. He seems nervous but still proceeds with other arguments.

01:00 p.m– The bench questions the second counsel thoroughly! 

01:10 p.m- Counsel tries to answer the questions confidently. The bench then asks the respondents to say their prayers. 

01:17 p.m- The court master thanks everyone and asks the judges to fill in the score sheets. Everyone departs!

Court Room 7: Petitioner TC 30 v. Respondent TC 9

12:15 p.m- Preliminary round 1 began after a minor delay. The counsel 1 for Petitioner enthusiastically started with the statement of jurisdiction and will deal with first two issues of the moot proposition and the second counsel will be contesting the rest of the issues.

12:23 p.m- The first counsel is moving ahead with the arguments confidently and is discussing Article 136 of the Constitution and she briefs about substantial questions of law concerning the petitioner’s freedom of expression and right to the internet. She claims the petition to be maintainable.

The counsel coherently elaborates that discretion of the President under Article 352 can’t be questioned and claims that the ground under which the emergency is proclaimed can’t come under the purview of the aforesaid mentioned article. She relied upon the landmark case of  “Minerva Mills”.

12:32 p.m- The time limit is up! The counsel pleaded for extension of time in order to complete the arguments. She was granted the extension of one minute by the bench. Hon’ble judge have also started questioning the arguments of the counsel as soon as the counsel lays down with her arguments. After the attempt to answer the questions put forward by the judge, the first counsel rested the case to the second counsel.

12:38 p.m – The second counsel from the petitioner has started with her arguments in a self-assured manner but the bench has been fairly active in bombarding questions. The counsel highlights the importance of the right to privacy under Article 21. She explains that keeping users’ data at risk violates the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression and mentions the recent landmark case on right to privacy i.e. the “Puttaswamy case”. The counsel claims that the cyber security law contains provisions in derogation of human rights and in light of protecting users’ data it is breaching data privacy. Relying on case laws the counsel concludes that the cyber security law and cryptocurrency law is unconstitutional.

12:47 p.m- The hon’ble judge has been grilling the speaker; however, the speaker seems unfazed by the cross-questioning. Relying on case laws the counsel concludes that the cyber security law and cryptocurrency law is unconstitutional. The questioning does not stop here. The courtroom scene is becoming more heated and interesting. The judge showers the counsel with provisional questions and at last, the counsel pleads ignorance.

12:50 p.m- The petitioners have concluded their contentions by reciting the prayer before the Hon’ble court.

12:57 p.m- The counsel for the respondent started with her arguments. The counsel is moving ahead with an aim of establishing the validity of cyber security law, cybercrime law, and crypto currency law. She concludes that the laws are not arbitrary and are constitutional because the restrictions imposed upon the right of freedom of speech and expression are reasonable and are to protect public order.

1:05 p.m- The esteemed bench has pointed out to clarify about the reasonable restrictions imposed by the laws. Through the cross-questioning the hon’ble judge has been trying to get greater clarity on the arguments advanced to them. The judge seemed to be fairly satisfied with the answer.

1:08 p.m- The Judge asked the first counsel to sum up her arguments and soon the co-counsel of the respondent started by briefing her issues.

1:15 p.m- The second counsel is also pressing on the point of legitimacy of the aforementioned laws and their validity based upon various international conventions. She submits that cyberattacks can be compiled as external aggression and thus proclaiming emergency and suspension of fundamental rights is legal and valid.

1:20 p.m- The esteemed bench has started questioning and the counsel is confidently trying to answer the questions. The bench seems unimpressed, the counsel’s initial confidence seems to be fading in the face of relentless questioning. With this, the judge asks the counsel to move on with the prayer.

1:23 p.m- The petitioners have started giving the Rebuttals to the arguments advanced by the respondents.

1:26 p.m- The Respondents seek to submit the Sur-Rebuttals.

1:30 p.m- The Preliminary round 1 concludes.

Court Room 8: Petitioner TC 14 v. Respondent TC 32

12:20 p.m- All the participants have joined in. Participants are being made aware of the rules. 

12:25 p.m- Here comes a besieging question from the bench regarding maintainability of the lawsuit. 

12:30 p.m- The petitioner counsel 1 proceeds in a determined manner. The speaker quickly guides the bench on the applicable laws and rules in the present lawsuit. She comes across as a confident speaker, who is well versed with the facts of the case.

12:40 p.m-  The  co-counsel of the petitioner begins with the next issue. She cites People’s Union For Democratic vs Union Of India & Others alongside Anuradha Bhasin vs Union of India to support her arguments.

12:45 p.m- The bench, with its questions, has baffled the co-counsel who is now on the back foot.

12:55 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench is quizzing the co-counsel with constant and seemingly bemusing questions. The co-counsel seems to struggle with the cross-questioning but it is clear that the quizzing has not trembled their determination!

01:00 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Respondent approaches the bench and seeks permission to proceed with the 1st issue. She contends that Special Leave Petition is not applicable in the Lawsuit present before the Hon’ble bench. The Counsel cites Pritam Singh vs The State along with Tahera Khatoon v. Salambin Mohammad to convince the bench that the lawsuit is not maintainable. 

01:10 p.m- The Counsel swiftly moves ahead with her submissions without having faced any grilling or a lot of follow-up questions by the bench so far. She cites Union of India v/s Era Educational Trust and another etc to brace her cause regarding non-maintainability of the lawsuit.

01:18 p.m- The counsel concludes her arguments and the co-counsel starts her submissions before the court. She has been granted the permission to go ahead with her arguments.

01:25 p.m – The co-counsel quotes the judgment of R Rajagopal vs. State of Tamil Nadu to strengthen issue number 2 and 3. The co-counsel of the respondents is on a roll here as she faces no questions from the judges. Now, whether this is a good sign or a bad one, that the scoresheet will only say! Let’s hope for the best. 

01:30 p.m – The co-counsel is vehemently putting forth her claims citing the Hague Rules and requesting the arbitrators to take note of the same. Looks like the co-counsel is paranoid given there are no questions from the arbitrators. She pauses her submissions and invites questions from them.

01:32 p.m – The Rebuttal and sur-rebuttal does not invite any questions. The judges have moved to deliberate on the round as the teams anxiously wait for feedback. Session 1 round has concluded. Interesting and fun overall.

Court Room 9: Petitioner TC 18 v. Respondent TC 33

12:10 p.m The judges have arrived along with the petitioners, but the respondents are nowhere to be seen. Everyone waits for the respondents to join the courtroom. 

12:20 p.m- The bench inquires about the whereabouts of the respondent team. The respondent team is facing some technical issues.

12:36 p.m- The bench has asked for an ex-parte!  Counsel 1 from the petitioner team has started with the discussion on the first issue.

12:45 p.m The counsel has dealt with their contentions on the first and second issues.

12:50 p.m- The first Counsel gives a concluding statement, and now Counsel 2 seeks permission to proceed with her issues. The permission has been granted.

12:52 p.m- Here we go! Counsel 2 proceeds with their submissions on the third issue. Further, The bench asks the counsel about some basic questions of law, and the counsel very confidently responds to them.

1:00 p.m- The petitioner’s counsel is done with their closing statements and seeks permission to proceed with the prayer. The Counsel reads the prayer before the Hon’ble judges.

1:10 p.m- The proceedings have concluded.

Court Room 10: Petitioner TC 19 v. Respondent TC 34

12:02 p.m- The Judges have arrived and we have been informed that this will be an ex-parte round as the Respondent team could not mark their presence.

12:07 p.m– The first counsel  from the petitioner side has begun her arguments. The counsel looks very confident in her demeanour. The speaker is briefly stating the facts of the case.

12:12 p.m – The Bench asked the counsel to list all the issues. The bench then asked her an intricate question from the first issue itself, however, she passed this question on to her co-counsel. The co-counsel inadvertently began to give his argument. The bench asked the second speaker to first seek the permission of the bench before speaking anything, the second speaker conspicuously looks flummoxed.

12:21 p.m.- The bench asked for the citation of one the cases mentioned by the counsel. The counsel was not able to give the proper citation of the same. 

12:28 p.m– The counsel is now giving her arguments on the second issue. The bench has once again asked her to explain a question that was previously asked by the bench. The bench is palpably not satisfied by her answer. The counsel now conspicuously looks nervous. 

12:31 p.m– The first counsel has now concluded with her arguments and has invited her co-counsel to postulate his arguments

12:33 p.m– The second counsel has begun his arguments, the bench has asked him the same question that was asked by the first counsel. The second counsel has attempted to provide the bench with an answer, the bench further asked him to further elaborate his answer and also posed few more questions.

12:39 p.m – The bench asked the second counsel about the famous case of Kesavananda Bharati. The second counsel asked for ignorance and passed the question to his co-counsel. The first counsel, with the due permission of the bench, stated the facts of the Kesavananda Bharati. The bench then moved ahead with the proceedings.

12:43 p.m- The proceedings have concluded and the judges have provided the participants with their valuable feedbacks and wished them luck for the future rounds.

Preliminary Rounds – II

Coming back to the courtrooms with a new zeal, we now head for the second round of the prelims.

Court Room 1: Petitioner TC 34 v. Respondent TC 14

3:55 pm – The teams are back for the second round with palpable enthusiasm. The renewed zeal of the participants, as well as of the Bench, show no mark of tiredness on their face. With every passing minute, the pressure can be sensed to be building up. But that will in no manner affect the counsel’s confidence and motivation to prove themselves. 

4:00 pm – As the petitioner is unavailable, the court proceedings shall continue ex parte!! The court clerk begins with the introduction. Silence! The court is in session.

4:05 pm – The counsel has informed their time division and so the round begins. The counsel begins with greeting the bench and energetically moves towards the arguments. The counsel has put before the bench the reasons to back up their arguments along with relevant case laws.

The counsel confidently articulates its points to ensure that the bench understands them in the same context. Dividing the arguments into sub issues seems to be working in the favor of the counsel.

4:15 pm- the counsel focuses on the Articles of the Constitution and substantiates the same with facts and case laws. The bench is carefully listening to the counsel and no questions have been asked. The counsel’s confidence is reflected in her words. The counsel addresses the bench on Article 19.

04:20 pm – By using legal maxims and UN coined definitions the counsel continues to the second issue. With no question being asked, the counsel reflects the confidence that it is able to pursue the bench. However, the judge’s silence keeps the counsel in a confusion about whether their arguments are strong enough to make the bench adjudicate in their favor.

The counsel explains the relevance of different sections of the Indian Penal Code and further talks about criminal conspiracy and the reasonable restriction that the government can enforce. And the first question has been asked!! The bench questions the counsel for the respondent about the reference of rarest of rare care that the counsel cited.

The bench has bombarded the counsel with questions, but it is answering them with facts and relevant laws. The questions have taken aback the counsel. However, the counsel continues to put forth her point without showing any nervousness. 

04:23 pm – The bench has asked the counsel regarding sedition. The counsel has begun stammering in her arguments but tries to provide the best possible solution. Asking about bitcoin, the petitioner’s action, and other questions about the facts, the bench has made the counsel anxious in her arguments. 

04:30 pm – The co-counsel continues with the arguments. The counsel addresses the bench on the last issue and begins with reciting important facts that are important for the case. The counsel seems a bit anxious with her arguments yet continues with the issue to pursue the bench. The bench with its undivided attention on the arguments, has maintained a neutral attitude. No questions asked up till now. 

04:36 pm – The counsel continues with her arguments citing relevant cases. The counsel concludes her arguments with reasoning and focusing on the facts and case laws. The counsel focuses on the questions raised and whether the petition is maintainable or not.

04:40 pm – The bench has begun to question the counsel on the grounds of maintainability of the petition. The counsel provides the grounds for maintainability but the bench seems unsatisfied. The question of the bench has left the counsel in a cold sweat and the courtroom falls silent.

The counsel seeks aid of the researcher and tries to answer the follow up questions of the bench. The bench has confused the counsel by raising queries on the fundamental rounds. The counsel is taken aback by the questions and asks the bench to rephrase the question.

04:46 pm – The counsel fails to answer the questions of the law, however taking it as a platform to educate the participants, the bench decides to explain its question and to acknowledge them about the legal provisions and key points about the constitution in reference to the case at hand.

After getting clarity of the question, the counsel once again addresses the bench to try and resolve their queries. The questions have got the counsel on the edge of their seat but with the urge and zeal to satisfy the judges, the counsel carefully answers the question.

04:50 pm – The follow-up questions of the bench have brought the counsels to a point of confusion. The bench states that it stands unsatisfied and the questions are unanswered. The bench further asks about the emergency and the confidence of the counsel for the respondent seems to be converting into a fear for their performance.

04:53 pm – The bench advises the counsel on the topics that require a better clarity and the legal provisions that they should focus upon.. With no rebuttals to take place, the proceedings come to an end. The participants have left the meeting and the judges are asked to score them. The results are much awaited to see which teams shall proceed to the next round.

Court Room 2: Petitioner TC 30 v. Respondent TC 1

4:08 p.m- Proceedings started. The counsel for the petitioner is elucidating the arguments of the 1st & 3rd issues on the petitioner’s side. The counsel’s arguments are based upon the grounds of constitutionality of the matter in question. Further in the argumentation, the counsel cites a plethora of authorities to reinforce her arguments substantially.

4:15 p.m- The counsel very fluidly answered the cross questioning by the Bench without any fuss whatsoever, maintaining the composure of her argumentative structure. The Bench questions the counsel upon the facts of the K.S. Puttaswamy Case and the counsel, with her slick statements, convinced the Bench by her answer.

4:26 p.m- The first counsel for the petitioner is now nearing the end of her allotted time while concluding her arguments with clear words. The second counsel for the petitioner fetched permission from the Bench to move forward with the remaining issues.

4:35 p.m- The Bench asks the second counsel about the circumstances in which a cyber attack will be considered a civil attack. With utmost clarity, the counsel explains the needful and the Bench seems to be convinced.

4:40 p.m- Well within the time limit, the second counsel concludes her argument with her prayer to the Bench, therefore, resting the case on behalf of the petitioner.

4:41 p.m- The first counsel for the respondent receives the Bench’s permission to go ahead with his opening arguments.

4:46 p.m- The Bench questions the relevance of one of the authorities cited by the counsel and asks the counsel to establish the nexus between the cited judgment and his argument. 

4:55 p.m- The first counsel for the respondent concludes his arguments by citing numerous relevant authorities and the second counsel for the respondent takes over the argumentation from here and moves forward with the remaining issues with the Bench’s affirmation.

5:02 p.m- The second counsel makes her arguments, unobstructed by any kinds of cross questions and rests her case by mentioning their prayer in front of the Bench.

5:04 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner rebuts the arguments made by the opposing counsels on various points.

5:18 p.m- The rebuttals are over and the proceedings are officially concluded.

Court Room 3: Petitioner TC 32 v. Respondent TC 19

4:03 p.m-  With the arrival of judges, the proceedings begin! After greeting the Hon’ble Bench the first counsel for the petitioner starts confidently with the arguments and argues on the first issue. Citing various judgements, Counsel 1 argues on maintainability of the petition. 

4:10 p.m- Referring to fact sheet, various statutes, cases and legislations the counsel for the petitioner presents her arguments smoothly. And here comes the brutal interrogation from the Hon’ble Bench. Counsel 1 looks dubious on the facts she just argued upon. 

4:20 p.m- The time got over for Counsel 1 but she requested the Hon’ble ladyship for a few more minutes, the permission was granted. Counsel proceeds with her arguments followed by answering the questions asked by the judges in-between. 

4:23 p.m- The second Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to move ahead with the second and third issues. Permission was granted. Starting confidently, the second counsel looks well prepared! 

4:33 p.m- The second counsel moves further smoothly. She refers to the case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India for advancing her arguments. The Bench is listening to the arguments with full concentration. 

4:36 p.m- The second counsel, on behalf of the petitioner, moves ahead with the prayer and requests for passing an order on their behalf. 

4:39 p.m- After greeting and taking the permission of the Hon’ble Bench, the first counsel for the respondents starts his arguments. And soon enough the counsel advances his arguments, he is interrogated with brutal questions. The judges are giving a tough time to counsel 1. The counsel looks anxious. 

4:49 p.m- The first counsel for the respondent advances his arguments, answering the questions of the Hon’ble Bench patiently. 

5:00 p.m- After seeking the permission of the Hon’ble Bench. The second counsel for the respondent then moves ahead with her arguments. Soon enough the second counsel begins, she was intervened by the ladyship to display the judgment, counsel 2 was referring to. The proceedings went on a break due to internet connectivity issues on the side of counsel 2 for the respondents’ side.  

5:05 p.m- The proceedings resume. The co-counsel seeks an apology for the inconvenience caused. Moving ahead, the co-counsel advances her arguments and wraps up with the prayer. 

5:12 p.m- The Bench doesn’t seem well convinced and asks further questions, leaving the counsel totally confused. No rebuttals and sur-rebuttal were put forth. 

5:15 p.m- The proceedings have been officially concluded. The judges gave their honest feedback to the counsels. The result awaits! 

Court Room 4 is not in session. 

Court Room 5: Petitioner TC 29 v. Respondent TC 9

04:02 p.m- The participants have arrived and are being briefed. One of the judges has joined the Courtroom as well. 

04:10 p.m- Everyone waits for the second judge to join. Participants are quite anxious and their demeanor shows their seriousness. 

04:13 p.m- A competition aids us to discover our true potential and how much more we can actually do than we thought. With this in mind, the competition begins with great enthusiasm! The second judge will be joining shortly. 

04:14 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner starts presenting the case with great vigor and confidence. 

04:18 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench does not seem to be satisfied with the answers given by the Counsel. This increases the tension and stress of the Counsel. However, their confidence and conviction remains unshaken! The second judge arrives!

04:20 p.m- The Bench seems exasperated as they are yet not convinced by the response of the Counsel for the Petitioner. The Bench proceeds to ask more intricate questions, throwing the Counsel off-guard. 

04:27 p.m- The Bench bombards the Counsel with another set of difficult questions relating to the rights of the press. The Counsel for the Petitioner is struggling to answer them and they are on pins and needles. 

04:31 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner proceeds to summarize their arguments and now the Co-counsel is in charge of taking the competition ahead. Before that, the Counsel has to respond to more questions of the Hon’ble Bench, and hence, the request for an extension of one minute which the Bench allows. 

04:39 p.m- The Co-counsel begins with their submissions. However, the Bench requests the Co-counsel to first answer the questions that the Counsel could not answer. The Co-counsel satisfactorily clarifies the queries of the Bench and proceeds with their arguments. 

04:44 p.m- The Co-counsel for the Respondent seems well versed with the arguments although it is not so with the facts of the case as they failed to elaborate it when asked by the Bench. The Co-counsel is presenting their submissions with great tranquility and clarity. 

04:50 p.m- The Co-counsel responds to the queries of the Bench with great lucidity and calmness. They are very careful with their words. 

04:52 p.m- With the permission of the Bench, the Co-counsel for the Petitioner proceeds with the Prayer. Now the dais is for the Counsels for the Respondent to occupy. 

04:53 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Respondent begins presenting their submissions. They speak with great energy and passion. 

05:00 p.m- The Bench puts forward some confusing questions but the Co-counsel impressively maintains their vigor and tone while responding to the queries. 

05:07 p.m- The Counsel for the Respondent gives a thorough description of legal provisions and case laws to back their arguments and emphasize the vital points. 

05:10 p.m- The Counsel on behalf of the Respondent summarizes their submissions and the Bench further interrogates. The responsibility now rests with the Co-counsel to proceed and bring some action to the competition!

05:13 p.m- The Co-counsel for the Respondent starts presenting their submissions! They seem quite nervous. The Hon’ble Bench has kept the participants on pins and needles with their strenuous questioning. 

05:20 p.m- The Co-counsel ardently answers the questions put forward by the Hon’ble Bench and is filled with energy and zeal.

05:24 p.m- The Co-counsel carries on with the presentation of their arguments with great poise and fluency. There is clarity of thought and submissions. The Hon’ble Bench listens avidly. 

05:30 p.m- Even though the specified time is up, the Co-counsel resumes speaking. 

05:32 p.m- The Co-counsel for the Respondent carries on with the Prayers. 

05:33 p.m- The Co-counsel for the Petitioner proceeds with the rebuttal and questions certain arguments presented by the Counsels of the Respondent using relevant case laws. It seems like they were really prepared for it. The Counsel on behalf of the Respondent bites the bullet and very vehemently answers the queries of the Petitioner’s Counsels. 

05:37 p.m- The Hon’ble Bench provides the participants with generous feedback. The constructive criticism will succor the participants to ameliorate their performance in future Moot Court Competitions. The Bench is quite neutral about the feedback. 

Court Room 6: Petitioner TC 21 v. Respondent TC 18

04:00 p.m- The second preliminary round starts with a minor delay. The petitioners i.e. team code-21 is not present so, the round will be an ex-parte. There shall be no rebuttals. Each counsel will speak for 15 minutes each. 

04:10 p.m- The first counsel argues the maintainability but the Bench demands to hear the facts. The counsel mentions the name of the case which the Bench asks her to help locate in the memorial, after a long pause, the case is found in the memorial.

04:20 p.m- The bench questions again, the situation seems tense, the counsel tries to tackle it somehow. She seems fierce! One more case comes up which wasn’t mentioned in the memorial so the Bench says that the court cannot rely upon the case which was not cited in the memorial or submitted later. 

04:24 p.m- The courtroom seems to witness an aggressive debate! The first counsel has exceeded her timer but is allowed for half a minute extension. The questions keep coming and she keeps answering.

04:30 p.m- Now, the second counsel takes her place. There is a series of questions from the Bench which is carefully tackled by the second council, this is done calmly as opposed to the first counsel’s argument.

04:35- A question related to the reasonableness of restrictions arises and the bench asks the counsel on behalf of the respondents to refer to that part.

04:40 p.m- After stating all her arguments, the counsel requests the Bench to proceed with the prayer, which is allowed. The counsel for the petitioner made a mistake while pleading for which the Bench asked her to review and make amends but she chose to reinstate the prayer. 

04:45 p.m- The counsel asks the Bench for a review which is provided, even though it was neither mandatory nor prohibited.

04:46 p.m- The proceedings for round 2 now come to an end after the Bench is requested to fill in the score sheet by the court master.

Court Room 7: Petitioner TC 22 v. Respondent TC 3

4:12 p.m- Preliminary Round 2 has begun after a minor delay but the teams look very enthusiastic about the same. The first counsel for the petitioner looks confident.

4:22 p.m- She started with the statement of jurisdiction and proceeded to the substantial question of maintainability of the petition. The counsel tries to emphasize and reiterate her points on infringement of the right to privacy which is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. She relied upon the landmark case of “A.D.M Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla”.

4:30 p.m- The Bench is patiently listening to the arguments made by the counsel. The counsel is advancing her arguments boldly. However, there is a turn in the situation, the counsel now seems perplexed by the question and the bench does not seem to be satisfied with the answers. The time is up! The bench asked the counsel to sum up her submissions within a minute. The counsel concluded with her submissions and rests the case upon her co-counsel.

4:40 p.m- The second counsel commences with her arguments in a self-assured way. However, the Hon’ble bench started bombarding her with questions. She was asked by the Hon’ble judge to put forward arguments to prove the right to the Internet is a Fundamental Right. The counsel is now nervous but manages to answer by relying upon the landmark case of “Anuradha Basin v. Union of India”. 

4:44 p.m- The petitioners have concluded their contentions by reciting the prayer before the Hon’ble bench.

4:48 p.m- The first counsel for the Respondent started with her arguments. The counsel is proceeding enthusiastically intending to establish the constitutionality of the Cyber Security Law, Cyber Crime Law, and Crypto-currency Law. The Hon’ble judge points out to mention the Corum strength of the case upon which she is referring to which the counsel answered calmly.

4:55 p.m- The counsel boldly justifies her arguments and in furtherance submits that the above-mentioned Cyber Laws does not violate Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The Bench asked her about the legal framework for combating and controlling cryptocurrency. The judges are grilling the first counsel but she manages to confidently answer all the questions and establish her points. The Bench seems to be impressed.

5:00 p.m- The second counsel for the Respondent started with his contentions. He claimed the cyber attacks are capable of interrupting a nation’s security and integrity, thus it can be compiled with external aggression and therefore the proclamation of emergency is constitutionally valid.

5:08 p.m- Consequently the counsel was asked by the Bench to proceed with the third issue. The Hon’ble Bench showered him with questions but the counsel consistently tried to justify his arguments and confidently answered the questions. The counsel concluded his submissions with prayer.

5:12 p.m- The Petitioners have started with the Rebuttals to the arguments advanced by the Respondents.

5:14 p.m- The Respondents seek to submit the Sur-Rebuttals justifying and convincing the Hon’ble Bench.

5:16 p.m- The Preliminary round 2 concludes.  

Court Room 8: Petitioner TC 23 v. Respondent TC 2

04:00 p.m- The Preliminary rounds 2 have begun! The teams are very excited for the same.

04:05 p.m- The Counsel for the Petitioner starts with briefing the Hon’ble Bench and submits her arguments very confidently. One of the judges questions the Counsel and the Counsel patently answers the question posed to her by one of the Judges.

04:15 p.m- One of the judges counter-questions the Counsel. She seems confident and answers every question diligently. One of the Judges counters the argument of the Counsel on the basis of the facts of the case. The Counsel asks the Judges if she can start with the third argument after answering the question of another judge very patiently. The  Counsel begins with the third argument.

04: 25 p.m- The time is up for the Counsel. The Court Master asks the co-counsel to begin with the arguments. The Co-counsel for the petitioner briefly talks about the fact and begins with the arguments. The co-counsel is patient and submits the arguments confidently. 

04: 32 p.m- The Judges ask the co-counsel to present similar case law. The co-counsel seems a bit nervous while answering the question of the Judge. The Judge seems satisfied with the answer of the co-counsel and asks to proceed with the next argument. The co-counsel for the petitioner submitted his issues and made his case very smoothly without much grilling from the Hon’ble Bench and moved to prayer.

04:35 p.m- The Counsel for the Respondent begins with her submissions. The Judges are patiently listening to her arguments. The Judges express their concerns regarding the Counsel’s arguments. The Counsel confidently guides the Judges to her interpretation. The Judges do not seem to be convinced by the Counsel’s arguments. The Counsel answers the question and the Judge appreciates her efforts.

04:45 p.m- The Counsel answers the question very confidently and continues to submit the arguments while referring to the precedents. The Judges are listening patiently to the submissions made. The Judges ask the Counsel to keep the submission brief. The Counsel asks for a 30-second extension of the time after the time is up. The Counsel tries to complete the argument on jurisdiction as fast as she can. 

04:50 p.m- The Counsel for the Respondent submits the prayer. The Co-Counsel for the Respondent seeks permission for beginning with the submission. The Speaker seems confident as she takes up the third and fourth issues. The Judges bombard the co-counsel with questions and seek clarification on the arguments. The co-counsel seemed confident while providing the answers. The Judge seems satisfied with the answer submitted by the co-counsel. The co-counsel continues with her submissions.

04:45 p.m- The co-counsel for the respondent begins with the fourth issue. The Judges question the jurisdiction. The co-counsel answers and the Judges seem satisfied with the answer. Another follow-up question is asked by another Judge. The co-counsel diligently and patiently listens to the question and provides clarification for the same. 

05:00 p.m- Co-counsel for the respondents completes her submission and asks the Hon’ble Judges’ permission to proceed with the prayer.

05:01 p.m- It is rebuttal time! The Counsel for the Petitioner raised a lot of concerns in a short span of time. She found many logical inconsistencies and loopholes in the submissions made by the respondents. Maybe, it was this excitement that made them lose track of time.

05:07 p.m- The respondents in a structured and effective manner managed to sur-rebut most of the questions which were posed.

05:10 p.m- The Counsels from both the sides have three things in common; speed, accuracy and fluency. They are extremely assertive in everything they say, which evidently worked amazingly well for the judges. The judges look satisfied. 

05:15 p.m- The judges are engrossed in an intense discussion over the scoring scheme while the participants patiently await their response and feedback. The feedback session has commenced following which we will be done for the day and will gear up for Day 2.

Court Room 9: Petitioner TC 26 v. Respondent TC 6

4:00 p.m- Both the teams have arrived in the courtroom, and are being made aware of the rules.

4:10 p.m- Everyone awaits the arrival of the second judge on the bench. 

4:20 p.m- Both the judges have also joined the courtroom. The court is in session now! The counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to proceed with their arguments on the first issue.

4:30 p.m- The counsel proceeds with their arguments with great zeal and confidence, but couldn’t keep up with it while answering the questions raised by Her Ladyship. The Hon’ble judges politely intervene with the counsel with certain questions, which adds to the stress and anxiety of the counsel. The counsel concluded their arguments and invited their co-counsel for presenting the arguments for the next issue.

4:40 p.m- Second counsel seeks the permission of the bench to deal with the second issue and proceed with their arguments. The counsel tries their level best to live up to the tough questions by the bench. The counsel seems confused regarding many points, which are asked by the judges.

4:48 p.m- The counsel proceeds with the second part of their arguments, and carries forward their submissions. Continuous and confusing cross-questions by the judges are giving a tough time to the counsel. 

4:53 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner submits their arguments and reads the prayer. The respondent seeks permission for the rebuttals, which was granted by the bench.

5:02 p.m- The counsel for the respondents begin with their arguments on the first issue, after seeking permission from the bench.

5:11 p.m- An interesting round of cross-questioning by the bench continues as the counsel moves ahead with their arguments on the issue. The Counsel seems to be confident while answering all the questions which were put forward by the Hon’ble judges.

5:20 p.m- Convincing the bench, the counsel finally submits their submissions and invites their co-counsel for their submissions. The second Counsel proceeds with their arguments and is continuously bombarded with the questions by the Hon’ble bench.

5:30 p.m- The counsel for the respondents seems to be quite perplexed by the twisted questions put forward by the bench, but continues to answer the questions very patiently.

5:34 p.m- The Court master reminds the counsel about the time limit, and the counsel seeks for the extension, which was granted by the bench. The counsel concluded their arguments, and submitted the prayers on behalf of the respondents.

5:38 p.m- The counsel on behalf of the petitioners submits their rebuttals, after seeking the permission from the bench. 

5:44 p.m- The counsel for respondents replies to the questions and rebuttals raised by the petitioners. 

5:52 p.m- The bench provides their valuable feedback to the participants, and praises the efforts made by both the teams, and their advocacy skills too. The participants leave the courtroom and the judges were briefed about the scoring. 

Court Room 10: Petitioner TC 27 v. Respondent TC 5

4:10 p.m – Hon’ble judges and all the participants have arrived and with an unfettering zeal the proceedings have started.

4:17 p.m- The counsel on behalf of Petitioner is arguing confidently while supporting her arguments with proper authorities.

4:20 p.m- The first counsel for Petitioner has concluded her arguments and has invited her co-counsel to present further arguments. The second counsel for Petitioner has started in an articulate and confident manner.

4:28 p.m – The Petitioner team has concisely concluded their arguments, the Bench did not ask any questions from them and the first counsel for the Petitioner has concluded with the prayer. The ball is in the Respondent’s court and they have begun to proceed with their arguments in an invigorated manner.

4:37 p.m – The counsel for the Respondent has been asked an intricate question and the counsel is doing a commendable job and answering the question in an elaborate manner. His answer invigorated the otherwise tending to be a monotonous environment of the courtroom. 

4:50 p.m – The first counsel for the Respondent has concluded his arguments and now has invited his co-counsel. The second counsel for the Respondent has carefully begun her arguments and has already stated a plethora of authorities to support her argument.

4:57 p.m – The second counsel for Respondent is being questioned incessantly and the counsel is attempting to answer those questions with great aplomb. 

5:07 p.m- The second counsel for Respondent has concluded her argument and prayer and now the Petitioners have been granted the permission to proceed with rebuttals. 

5:10 p.m- The Petitioners have posed an interesting rebuttal for the Respondents and now the Respondents are attempting to answer the rebuttal.

5:12 p.m- The Respondents have answered the rebuttal and the Bench looks pleasantly satisfied by the performance of both the teams. The Bench also provided useful feedback for the teams and wished them luck for their future endeavors.

Day – 2

Much awaited results of the two preliminary rounds have now arrived. Eight teams have advanced to the Quarter-Finals. The fixture is as follows:

Courtroom 1: Petitioner TC 9 v. Respondent TC 6

Courtroom 2: Petitioner TC 30 v. Respondent TC 29

Courtroom 3: Petitioner TC 5 v. Respondent TC 26

Courtroom 4: Petitioner TC 18 v. Respondent TC 32

Congratulations to the teams and we wish them all the best for today’s rounds. See you all at noon!

Quarter-Finals

The eagerly awaited rounds have now begun!

Court Room 1:  Petitioner TC 9 v. Respondent TC 6

12:19 p.m- Quarterfinal rounds began with a minor delay. The teams seem excited for the much-awaited rounds.

The first counsel for the Petitioner started enthusiastically by stating the statement of jurisdiction and establishing locus standi. She will be dealing with the first two issues whereas the rest of the issues would be contested by the second counsel.

12:25 p.m- The first counsel is moving ahead with her submissions confidently and is discussing Article 136 of the Constitution which deals with special leave petition and she briefs about substantial questions of law concerning the petitioner’s freedom of expression and right to the internet. She claims the petition to be maintainable.

12:34 p.m- The Hon’ble bench asked her to clarify why the petitioner has not invoked original jurisdiction. The counsel seems unfazed by the cross-questioning but manages to answer the question. The courtroom scene is becoming piping hot and fascinating. The bench has been fairly active in bombarding questions. The Hon’ble Judges seem unsatisfied with the answers, the initial confidence of the counsel seems to be fading in the face of the relentless questioning. The Bench asks the counsel to move on to the next argument.

12:41 p.m- The time is up! The counsel requested for an extension of a few minutes to complete her arguments. She was granted an extension of a minute and was asked to quickly wrap up her arguments. The counsel was asked to elaborate on the emergency provision.

12:47 p.m- The second counsel started with her arguments by reciting “Doctrine of Severability”, but she was interrupted by the Bench and was asked to first establish the constitutionality of the Cyber Law at the first instance and also to elaborate on the background of the same basing the arguments upon constitutional provisions. After an attempt to answer and convince the bench, the second counsel moves on to the next issue.

12:55 p.m- Proceeding with the arguments the counsel relied upon the landmark case of “PUCL v. Union of India”, and contended that the Cyber Security Law is unconstitutional as it violates the right to privacy. She claimed that under the disguise of protecting users’ data the Cyber laws are breaching privacy and are in derogation of human rights. Further, she contended that Cryptocurrency Law is also in violation of Article 19 of the Constitution.

01:06 p.m- The Bench started questioning the arguments of the counsel and pressed upon the point to describe reasonable restrictions which the counsel was contesting. She relied upon the landmark case of “Anuradha Basin v. Union of India” and struggled hard but the judges did not seem to be fairly satisfied with the answer. With this, the counsel for the petitioner concluded her submissions by reciting the prayer before the Hon’ble Bench.

01:15 p.m- After a small break, the first counsel for the Respondent has started with his arguments. The Bench initiated by questioning the arguments of the counsel as soon as the counsel lays down the structure of his arguments. The counsel proceeded with establishing that the petition is not maintainable as the alternate remedies were not exhausted.

01:26 p.m- Proceeding further with his submissions he argued that power under Article 136 should be exercised with caution and he relied upon the case of “M.C. Mehta v. Union of India”. The Bench pointed out the issue of original jurisdiction and asked the counsel to explain the same referring to the memorandum. The counsel seems perplexed but tries to answer the question, although the Bench is not convinced.

01:34 p.m- The current courtroom scene can be well described as a pot boiling dramatic thriller! The Hon’ble bench is consistently bombarding questions upon the counsel and the counsel seems to be cold feeted but tries to answer calmly. The Hon’ble judge citing a recent case cross-questioned the counsel. The counsel is struggling hard to convince the Bench by beating around the bush, however the Bench seems unimpressed.

01:46 p.m- The first counsel for the respondent summed up his arguments and rested the case to his co-counsel. The second counsel proceeded to establish the legitimacy of the Cyber Laws and by relying upon the case of “Ritesh Sinha v. State of U.P”, she argued that fundamental rights can be curtailed on reasonable grounds. The Bench asked the counsel to clarify her arguments keeping in mind the due process of law which was laid down in “Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India”.

01:58 p.m- The counsel in furtherance of contesting the validity and constitutionality of the Cyber Laws elaborates the test for determining proportionality as laid down in the case of “K.S Puttaswamy v. Union of India”. The Bench pointed out the arguments of the counsel and asked her to establish that an emergency was required. She was also asked to prove the requirement of implementing Cyber Laws along with the reasonableness of the laws. The situation in the courtroom is becoming tenser as well as exciting with the consistent cross-questioning. The Bench seems unimpressed.

02:12 p.m- After a thrilling question-answer round the Bench asked the counsel to conclude her submission and move on with the prayer.

02:14 p.m- The petitioners have started giving the Rebuttals to the arguments advanced by the respondents.

02:16 p.m- The respondents seek to submit the Sur-Rebuttals.

02:18 p.m- The Quarter Finals concludes.

Court Room 2: Petitioner TC 30 v. Respondent TC 29

12:00 p.m – The participants have started to arrive and one of the judges has joined the Courtroom as well!

12:08 p.m – The judges and the participants have arrived and are being briefed.

12:10 p.m – With the great spirit of competition in mind, the Courtroom is in session! The Counsel for the Petitioner starts presenting their submissions with palpable energy and enthusiasm. 

12:14 p.m – The Counsel is unstoppable! They are very vehemently presenting their arguments with relevant case laws and legal provisions. The Hon’ble Bench is listening to the arguments ardently. 

12:17 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench energetically intervenes and presents a question in front of the Counsel. The Counsel responds that they would like to clarify it in the subsequent issues. With the permission of the Bench, they proceed with their chain of argumentation.

12:20 p.m – The Bench puts forward another set of questions for the Counsel to answer. Though the questions seem confusing, the confidence of the Counsel remains unshaken which is quite impressive! They answer all the questions of the Hon’ble Bench with great conviction.

12:27 p.m – The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner continues to tackle the questions of the Hon’ble Bench with the same clarity and articulation. They appear to be well versed with their arguments and authorities. 

12:32 p.m – The Counsel summarizes their stance and now the Co-counsel is in charge of the argumentation. 

12:33 p.m – The Co-counsel vigorously commences with their set of presentation of arguments!

12:40 p.m – After listening to the arguments of the Co-counsel for the Petitioner quite patiently for some time, the Hon’ble Bench interrupts and starts interrogating them. The Co-counsel seems firm about their position and carries on to answer the queries of the Hon’ble Court with great courage. 

12:46 p.m – The Co-counsel elucidates their position while answering the Hon’ble Bench, using legal principles and then showing their nexus to the case in hand. A good strategy indeed!

12:50 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench seems satisfied with the response of the Co-counsel and they carry on with their line of reasoning. 

12:55 p.m – The Bench is trying to give a tough time to the Co-counsel, who in turn seems anxious. The Bench is not satisfied with the Prayers as the Counsels for the Petitioner were not able to fully convince the Bench. 

12:56 p.m – The Counsel for the Respondent begins with their presentation of arguments with great zeal!

1:00 p.m – The attitude of the Counsel makes it evident that they are quite stressed. However, they continue to articulate their position substantially. The Hon’ble Bench is listening to the arguments avidly. 

1:05 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench presents their first question for the Counsel for the Respondent. The Counsel responds patiently and with great clarity. 

1:10 p.m – The cross-questioning by the Bench adds to the anxiety of the Counsel and they seem pretty shaken by it. The Counsel is struggling to answer the questions however they seem very careful with the words they are using. 

1:16 p.m – The Counsel needs to calm down! Their nervousness has increased and they have started hesitating. The Hon’ble Bench continues to give them a hard time by pointing out that their queries have not been clarified yet by the Counsel. The pressure of Moot Court is brutal!

1:18 p.m – The Co-counsel starts with their portion of the presentation quite calmly.

1:24 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Respondent proceeds with their line of arguments with the same fluency and tone. Even at this stage of the competition, they seem quite pacific which is commendable. 

1:27 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench remains mum and asks the Co-counsel to carry on with their submissions. Is this the calm before a storm? 

1:30 p.m – A Moot Court experience is nothing without the attack of the Hon’ble Bench with twisted questions! The Co-counsel on behalf of the Respondent is targeted with another set of questions. 

1:39 p.m – The time is up for the Co-counsel and they proceed with the Prayers after taking the permission of the Bench. It is time when both the teams will lock horns for the rebuttal/sur-rebuttal round!

1:42 p.m – The Counsel for the Petitioner is back with the same confidence! They attack the Counsels for the Respondent with certain questions and clarify the queries of the Hon’ble Bench as well. However, the Bench does not seem to be satisfied with the reasoning put forward by the Counsel for the Petitioner. 

1:49 p.m – The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner has presented a plethora of questions in front of the Opposing Counsel. They ask for one minute of extension from the Bench which is duly granted. 

1:53 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Respondent responds to the questions of the Counsels for the Petitioner with great diligence.

1:54 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench provides fruitful feedback and clears certain doubts of the participants. They give their best wishes to the participants and the session ends. The result awaits!

Court Room 3: Petitioner TC 5 v. Respondent TC 26

12:00 p.m- All the participants and the Hon’ble judges have arrived in the courtroom. 

12:05 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner greets the bench and seeks permission to continue with the statement of facts for the said case.

12:14 p.m- The counsel further states the issues before the Hon’ble court, and proceeds with their arguments on the first issue.

12:25 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner moves swiftly and confidently with their arguments further on the second issue, as they receive no counter questions from the Hon’ble judges.

12:28 p.m- Time up for the first counsel! It’s time for the second counsel to submit their arguments for the third issue. The counsel proceeds their arguments with great confidence and enthusiasm, after seeking permission from the Hon’ble bench.

12:36 p.m- Here comes the first question for the counsel! And the counsel, with their sharp answer, convinces the Hon’ble Judge and continues with their arguments.

12:46 p.m- The counsel seems really well-versed with their arguments! After convincing the bench on their questions, the counsel summarizes their arguments, and reads the prayer before the Hon’ble court.

12:57 p.m- Now, it’s the time for the respondent counsel to present their submissions. They proceed with their first arguments, after the permission of the Hon’ble bench. The counsel for the respondents, with great zeal, moves forward with their arguments on the first issue.

1:08 p.m- Looks like the Bench is not completely satisfied with the arguments of the counsel, and asks some questions about the current status of certain laws. The counsel answers them in the same bold tone and continues with their submissions.

1:18 p.m- The counsel wraps up their submissions and calls their co-counsel to take the proceedings further. It’s time for the co-counsel to continue with their set of argumentation on the second issue.

1:26 p.m- Hon’ble Judge presents some questions before the counsel, making them quite perplexed. However, the counsel very patiently answers and tries to convince the bench with their arguments. 

1:32 p.m- The second counsel seems to be a bit nervous while presenting their arguments, however continues smoothly, without inviting any cross-questions by the Hon’ble Judges.

1:38 p.m- The counsel for the respondent asks for an extension to finish their arguments, and has been granted the same. The Bench bombards the counsel with a series of twisted questions, making the counsel nervous. The struggle of Moot Court is real!

1:41 p.m- After satisfying the queries of the Bench, the counsel reads the prayer before the Hon’ble court, after their permission. 

1:43 p.m- Time for rebuttals/ sur- rebuttals! The counsel for the petitioner asks for the permission of the bench to continue with their submissions for the rebuttals, which has been granted. They put forward a series of questions before the respondents, and point out flaws in the arguments made by them. 

1:50 p.m- The counsel for the respondents is all set to present their arguments. The temperature of the courtroom is heated by the arguments from both sides! The respondent counsel very diligently responds to each question and issue, which were pointed by the counsel for petitioners. They presented various legal arguments and based their arguments on the established case laws. 

2:02 p.m- The counsel for respondents concludes their submissions for the rebuttals, and answers the questions posed by the Hon’ble judges.

2:07 p.m- The Hon’ble judges provide their valuable feedback to the participants, and praise them for their sincere efforts. This was an end to an amazing quarter-final round of argumentation by both parties! Everyone leaves the courtroom, and now they wait for the results!!

Court Room 4: Petitioner TC 18 v. Respondent TC 32

12:06 p.m- The Bench and all the participants have arrived, the Quarter Final Rounds have finally begun.

12:09 p.m- Just a few minutes in, and the questions have started to pour in and the counsel for Petitioner takes her time and answers the question gracefully.

12:20 p.m- The counsel for Petitioner is arguing confidently while supporting her arguments with proper authorities.

12:22 p.m- The counsel for Petitioner has concluded her arguments and has invited her co-counsel to present further arguments. The second counsel for Petitioner has started in an articulate and confident manner.

12:30 p.m- The second counsel for Petitioner is moving forward with her arguments in a smooth and effective manner.

12:36 p.m-  The Bench interrupts the flow of the second counsel for Petitioner by asking her an intricate question, the counsel fumbles a bit, the Bench asks her to continue with her arguments.

12:40 p.m- The second counsel for Petitioner has concluded her arguments and also with the Prayer. The ball is in the Respondent’s court and they have begun to proceed with their arguments in an invigorated manner.

12:50 p.m- The counsel for Respondent is continuing with her stellar arguments while supporting her arguments with a plethora of authorities.

12:55 p.m- The counsel for Respondent has concluded her arguments and has invited her co-counsel. The second counsel for Respondent has begun her arguments diligently.

1:06 p.m- The second counsel for Respondent is continuing with her arguments in a comprehensive manner. 

1:09 p.m- The second counsel has concluded her arguments and is now proceeding with the Prayer.

1:11 p.m- The counsel for Petitioner has now begun with her rebuttal, the second counsel for Petitioner has also posed an intricate and detailed rebuttal question for the Respondents.

1:13 p.m- The counsel for Respondent has begun to answer the rebuttal in a confident manner.

1:18 p.m- The unwavering and precise rebuttal round has concluded.

Semi-Finals 

The wait is over! The Semi-Final Rounds are as follows:

Courtroom 1: Petitioner TC 5 v. Respondent TC 30

Courtroom 2: Petitioner TC 32 v. Respondent TC 9

We are honored to be joined by Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Ms. Ashima Ohri, Managing Editor, BW Legal World, Mr. Sushanth Samudrala, Cyber Law Expert, Techno Legal Consultant and CEO, Sushant IT Law Associates and Mr. Kamal Dave, Advocate and Managing Partner, Cyberjuris as members of the Bench. 

Congratulations and all the best to the teams! See you at 4:00 p.m.

Courtroom 1: Petitioner TC 5 v. Respondent TC 30

 

4:11 p.m- The Bench and all the participants have arrived and the Semi-Final Rounds have begun.

4:14 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner is briefly stating the facts of the case to the Bench, the counsel looks very confident in his demeanor.

4:23 p.m- The counsel for the petitioner continues to provide his stellar arguments in an efficient manner.

4:33 p.m- The ardor in the arguments of counsel for the petitioner is palpable, the environment in the courtroom is invigorating. The round is not a monologue but rather an engaging exchange of words between the bench and the counsel.

4:41 p.m- The counsel for petitioner has exceeded his time limit and now has invited his co-counsel to present further arguments. The second counsel for petitioner has begun her arguments with a smile on her face exhibiting the confidence she holds.

4:51 p.m- The second counsel for petitioner steadily continues to proceed with her arguments while backing her arguments with a plethora of authorities. 

4:58 p.m- The second counsel for the petitioner has concluded her arguments and is now proceeding with the Prayer. 

5:00 p.m- After an impeccable round of deliberations by the petitioner, the ball is in the respondent’s court.

5:10 p.m- The counsel for the respondent continues to provide her arguments, the Bench asked her to specifically mention particular points in her arguments.

5:18 p.m- The counsel for the respondent was asked an intricate question by the Bench, she answered the question with great aplomb. The Bench seemed satisfied with her answer.

5:21 p.m- The counsel for the respondent has exceeded her time limit and has sought for an extension which has been granted by the Bench.

5:24 p.m- The counsel for the respondent has concluded her arguments and has invited her co-counsel to proceed with her arguments.

5:29 p.m- The second counsel for the respondent is proceeding with her arguments in a smooth and confident manner.

5:36 p.m- The second counsel for the respondent has been asked a number of questions by the Bench and the counsel is attempting to answer these questions to the best of her ability. The Bench seems satisfied with the answer.

5:38 p.m- The second counsel for the respondent has begun the Prayer.

5:40 p.m- The unwavering and precise rebuttals have begun

5:50 p.m- The rebuttal and sur-rebuttal has now concluded. The Bench has also provided the participants with their valuable feedback.

Courtroom 2: Petitioner TC 32 v. Respondent TC 9

04:00 p.m – The participants and the judges have arrived, the semi-finals will start shortly after the briefing. The participants seem ready to put their heart and soul into the session!

04:07 p.m – One step closer to the finals, the much awaited semi-finals ultimately begins! The counsel on behalf of the Petitioner starts presenting with sheer grace and confidence.

04:10 p.m – The counsel tries to tackle the question of maintainability of the present case when the Hon’ble Bench presents their first question of the session.

04:18 p.m – The Bench continues to listen to the arguments of the counsel steadily. 

04:19 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench mentions certain points from the memorial submitted by the team and proceeds to ask questions. 

04:22 p.m – The queries of the Bench seem to have affected the conviction of the strong counsel. However, the counsel tries to deal with the questions vehemently and gracefully. 

04:30 p.m – It has been a few minutes since the time specified for the counsel got over, but the counsel is yet not done with their arguments. The sudden increase in pace makes it evident that the counsel is quite stressed about it and wishes to finish their presentation without any further delay. 

04:32 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench is not content with the response of the counsel and puts emphasis on their questions again.

04:40 p.m – The co-counsel seems quite assertive in their attitude and cites a plethora of relevant authorities to back their arguments.

04:47 p.m – The co-counsel moves forward with their line of stellar argumentation while the Hon’ble Bench asks a question or two in between. 

04:53 p.m – The Bench interrupts the co-counsel with a complex question which has taken the co-counsel by surprise. They request the Bench for a few seconds to refer to their memorials. The Bench generously grants the time. 

04:59 p.m – The co-counsel proceeds with the Prayer. The responsibility of moving the session forward actively lies on the shoulders of the counsel for the Respondent now.

05:05 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench has very thoroughly gone through the Moot Proposition and the Memorials which is quite clear from their questions. This has made the counsel for the Respondent break into cold sweat. 

05:12 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench clarifies the application of the legal maxim pari materia.

05:20 p.m – The co-counsel for the Respondent begins with their submissions! 

05:26 p.m – The co-counsel carries forward their premise graciously while the Hon’ble Bench patiently listens. We can expect another round of questioning any minute now.

05:33 p.m – The co-counsel is still continuing with their submissions passionately with exceptional arguments and authorities, without any such intervention from the Hon’ble Bench. The Bench is listening to the reasoning of the co-counsel for the Respondent with their undivided attention. 

05:39 p.m – The co-counsel proceeds with the Prayers. The Hon’ble Bench finally begins with the interrogation! 

05:42 p.m – The rebuttal/sur-rebuttal round commences! The counsel for the Petitioner do not intend to leave any stone unturned before they come forward to attack the stance of the opposing counsel. 

05:44 p.m – The counsel for the Respondent sanguinely responds to the queries put forward by the counsel of the Petitioner. 

05:46 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench states that they are not convinced with the arguments presented by both the teams. However, the Bench appreciates the effort of the teams and has said that they made a good attempt. 

Finals

The wait is finally over! The finals will be between:

Petitioner TC 9 v. Respondent TC 5

Congratulations to both teams and all the best for tomorrow! The bench for the final round of the moot consists of eminent legal luminaries.

Bench

HMJ (Retd.) Manju Goel, Former Judge, High Court of Delhi,
Mr. Nidhish Bhatnagar, Director, School of Information Technology, Artificial Intelligence and Cyber Security (SITAICS),
Brigadier Balan, Cyber Law Expert,
Dr. Anurag Batra, Founder, BY Businessworld and Exchange4Media,
Mr. Alok Vijayant, Director, Cyber Security Operations, Govt. of India,
Mr. Rakesh Maheshwari, Sr. Director, Cyber Law and E-Security, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Govt. of India,
Mr. Akhilesh Tuteja, Global Cyber Security, KPMG.

THE ROUND BEGINS!!!

12:00 p.m – The enthusiastic participants and judges have started to join! The judges are now joining the breakout room to discuss the criteria for marking the teams. 

12:07 p.m – It is not a piece of cake to reach here. It has been a cut-throat competition and the finalists are ready to lock horns with each other. The energy and excitement can be seen in the demeanor of the participants, but there is a wave of seriousness and nervousness too. 

12:08 p.m – The judges are back! The representative of the Moot Court Committee, NUSRL gives a warm welcome to everyone and introduces the judges. 

12:12 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench addresses the participants and encourages them to perform well. 

12:14 p.m – The long-awaited moment is ultimately here! The Courtroom is in session! 

12:15 p.m – The Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner commences the presentation of their submissions.

12:20 p.m – The Counsel has come prepared! They are armored with stellar arguments and a plethora of relevant authorities.

12:27 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench puts forward their first question of the Finals! The Counsel is indomitable. They responded to the question with full conviction and faith.

12:30 p.m – The Counsel for the Petitioner carries on with their line of reasoning with great assertiveness. 

12:33 p.m – The Counsel is done presenting their part of the arguments and is now being interrogated by the Bench. The Counsel continues to answer the questions with clarity and patience.

12:39 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Petitioner starts presenting after duly taking permission from the Bench. 

12:41 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench generously allows the Co-counsel to take a minute after the proceedings get interrupted due to some network disruption.

12:42 p.m – The Co-counsel moves forward with their submissions with great vigor.

12:50 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Petitioner carries on with substantial vivacity. The Hon’ble Bench listens to the arguments quite avidly.

12:51 p.m – Here comes another set of questions from the Bench! This is just a drop in the bucket, we can expect some brutal interrogation from the Hon’ble Bench later on. The Co-counsel responds that they will elaborate the answers in the next set of arguments they are going to present.

12:59 p.m – The Co-counsel gracefully answers the queries of the Hon’ble Bench through their line of argumentation. The Hon’ble Bench comes forward with a follow-up question which is again answered by the Co-counsel diligently. 

1:05 p.m – The Co-counsel is now against the clock! The specified time is over. However, the Hon’ble Bench kindly allows the Co-counsel to continue with their presentation. 

1:07 p.m – The Co-counsel proceeds with the Prayers and the Hon’ble Bench asks a final set of questions from the Co-counsel for the Petitioner before the Counsel for the Respondent takes the dais and gets going with their premise. 

1:12 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Petitioner sums up their arguments. 

1:14 p.m – The Counsel for the Respondent starts with their presentation of submissions with great zeal.

1:20 p.m – The Counsel carries on with their premise with unshaken confidence. They are careful with their words and are taking help from various legal authorities to back their arguments. 

1:23 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench asks an intricate question from the Counsel. The Counsel very brilliantly tackles the question and responds graciously. 

1:29 p.m – The Counsel throws light on the theory of Social Contract and draws a nexus between the case in question and the theory quite impressively. 

1:35 p.m – The Counsel is done with their presentation. The Hon’ble Bench begins with strenuous questioning. The Counsel on behalf of the Respondent meekly replies to the queries with great articulation. 

1:38 p.m – The Co-counsel comes forward and begins presenting their contention with splendid ardour. 

1:45 p.m – The Co-counsel seems invincible! They fearlessly proceed with their case with glorious belief. The Hon’ble Bench quietly listens to the Co-counsel. 

1:51 p.m – The pressure of the Finals is too high! The Co-counsel for the Respondent fumbles a little but goes on elegantly. 

1:54 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench objects that the Co-counsel has failed to throw light on a question of fact. The Co-counsel clearly did not see this coming and was taken aback. However, in merely a few seconds they jump back and clarify the objection with utmost lucidity. 

2:02 p.m – Though the Hon’ble Bench is giving a hard time to the Co-counsel for the Respondent, the Co-counsel responds to the cross-questioning of the Bench quite thoughtfully and courteously. 

2:07 p.m – The Co-counsel has exceeded their time by a few minutes already so the Hon’ble Bench requests them to move forward. The Co-counsel concludes their arguments and proceeds with the Prayers.

2:09 p.m – The Counsel for the Petitioner takes the bull by the horns and attacks the Counsel for the Respondent with an impressive set of objections and queries for the rebuttal/sur-rebuttal round.

2:14 p.m – The Co-counsel for the Respondent calmly responds to the questions of the Opposing Counsel with magnificent eloquence. 

2:22 p.m – The Hon’ble Bench provides generous feedback and praises the participants. Both the teams presented very well. The Bench points out that it was a close competition and they thoroughly enjoyed the proceedings. The result now is anyone’s call. 

Valedictory Ceremony

2:53 p.m – The Valedictory Ceremony commences! Amisha Dwivedi welcomes everyone and introduces Justice Manmohan Sarin and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva.

2:57 p.m – Amisha Dwivedi gives a generous introduction of the other esteemed guests.

3:00 p.m – Dr. Pavan Duggal addresses the audience. He discusses the various aspects of Cyber Law and its history and development. He also sheds light on the position of cyberspace during the pandemic and compares it with its status pre-pandemic.

3:09 p.m – Dr. Pavan Duggal proceeds to thoroughly discuss the significance and importance of cyber laws. He deliberates on the need for concrete cyber security laws in both the domestic and international levels. He remarks that such progress is inevitable with the advent of cryptocurrency, increasing progress in AI, and the Internet of Things. 

3:12 p.m – Mr. Rakesh Maheshwari is called upon to speak to the audience. He deliberates over certain legal provisions relevant to Cyber Law. He proposes that new legislation is needed to regulate cyberspace. He requests everyone to come forward with their suggestions regarding the same. 

3:22 p.m – Mr. Nidhish Bhatnagar gives a short speech and very benevolently congratulates the participants.

3:23 p.m – Mr. Akhilesh Tuteja begins addressing the audience. He discusses that the legal field needs to develop at the same pace as the technology and be more robust.

3:28 p.m – Brigadier Balan converses with the audience. He discusses the effects of social media or digital media. He points out that the influence of digital media on people is a bit of a concern and it is essential to regulate it in a proper manner. He emphasizes that a balance should be maintained in controlling the digital media and the democratic principles of the country.

3:34 p.m – Mr. Alok Vijayant begins addressing the spectators. He deliberates upon the challenges concerning cyber security and that the pace of the research and development should match up with the speed with which the domain of cyber security is increasing. He further elaborates upon the recent developments in cyberspace like the usage of bitcoins and blockchain, and how the legal field should look upon the security of those as well.

3:42 p.m – Justice Manju Goel starts conversing with the audience. She quite humbly appreciates the participants and encourages them for the future. She points out 3Ps one needs to keep in mind before arguing in front of a Bench – perception, preparation and presentation. Her valuable insights are definitely going to aid the participants to do better.

3:49 p.m – Justice Manmohan Sarin is now addressing the listeners. He is concerned about the fact that a common man is not aware of all the safety measures required while using cyberspace. So, he emphasizes that proper awareness and education is needed in this matter. He shares his personal experiences of moot court competitions to motivate the finalists.

He further discusses the utility of a moot court competition and how it aids in polishing our skills and enhancing our legal knowledge. He elucidates the necessary skills of the legal profession and describes how a moot court competition helps in ameliorating them.

4:20 p.m – Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva is called upon to address. He throws light upon the ground reality of the moot courts in the 1980s, when he was a law student. He requests the colleges to provide for special training in the moot courts. He shares a presentation and shows the evolution of mobile phones, computers and other electronic applications. It was not until 1995 when India finally entered the virtual world. He explains that with such development came many legal issues and crimes like identity theft, corporate espionage, etc. and further provides for certain tips for cyber security. 

4:46 p.m – The most awaited time is finally here. It is time for the results!! Justice Manju Goel, Justice Manmohan Sarin and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva do the honours. Congratulations to all the winners!

Winning Team – SASTRA, deemed to be University,

Runners Up – School of Legal Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology,

Best Speaker – Thara Elizabeth Thomas, School of Legal Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology,

Best Researcher – Tisya Bagchi, Symbiosis Law School, Noida,

Best Memorial – SVKM’s Pravin Gandhi College of Law, Mumbai.

4:51 p.m – Prof. (Dr.) Kesava Rao Vurrakula addresses the audience and humbly expresses his gratitude and speaks on the success of the competition. 

4:57 p.m – Ms. Priya Vijay, Faculty Convenor, Moot Court Committee, NUSRL  presents a heartful Vote of Thanks.

With this, the 1st International Cyber Law Moot Court Competition comes to a graceful end. NUSRL and Cyberlaw University thanks EBC-SCC Online for their contributions as Knowledge Partners, the Hon’ble Judges for gracing the event, the participants and the organizing team.

We hope to see you soon with the future editions of this competition!

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Jharkhand High Court: A Division Bench of Dr Ravi Ranjan, CJ and Sujit Narayan Prasad, J., while issuing directions for encircling the infrastructure, laid emphasis on State obligation for maintaining Institutions of eminence.

Court while responding to the State’s counter-affidavit promising Rs 70 Crore to the institution, said, “… the University like the other universities and various other National Law Universities in other States cannot thrive on the revenue collected through fees deposited by the students for its development and meeting the routine expenses. Like other universities, certain grants on regular basis, monthly or yearly should be given by the State of Jharkhand. For example, there is a provision in the Patna University Act regarding meeting the budgetary expenses from the consolidated fund of the State… let our sentiment be conveyed to the State that being a prime institution of the State, NUSRL definitely needs regular support of the State Government and it is high time that the State Government should think over it that for every small or big expenditure the Vice-Chancellor of the University should not be compelled to move door to door. Therefore, in our view, the State Government should come up with a policy for such type of support to the institution if it is of the opinion that this institution is beneficial for the State of Jharkhand especially when we have been informed that 50% of seats in the University has been reserved for the candidates of State of Jharkhand

 With respect to the present assistance required from the State government, Court directed; “immediate issue of encircling the land of the university lying on the other side of the road by erecting boundary wall has to be taken as urgent basis.”[Bar Association, Jharkhand High Court v. State of Jharkhand, 2020 SCC OnLine Jhar 1060, decided on 11-12-2020]


Sakshi Shukla, Editorial Assistant has put this story together