Moot-court problem

BKS PRAKASH (Querist) 03 July 2014 This query is : Resolved
MOOT - COURT PROBLEM - II

Facts of the Case:
Dr. Gupta was famous Gynecologist. He was working in Government Hospital .He always busy in making new invention .As part of study and invention he wants to procreate test tube baby .He collects semen from his friend namely john , who was unmarried business man .John was the best friend of Dr.Gupta he was ready to give the semen for invention and study purpose . He also took promise from Dr. Gupta that, he will not use his semen other than above purpose.
Dr.Gupta promised that, semen used only for the purpose of invention and that semen was used in laboratory only.
Meanwhile, Mr. and Mrs. Singh visited Government Hospital for gynecology treatment .Their marriage was solemnized before 10 years but they had no child. They approach to Dr.Gupta for the same. Dr.Gupta after making some medical investigation of couple comes to the conclusion that, husband was not able for procreation of child due to - Anti-sperm antibodies. But same facts did not disclose to that couple and he gave assurance i.e. after small operation on Mr. Singh they will be blessed with child .For treatment and operation he demanded Rs. 5,00,000 from Mr.singh.
Mr. and Mrs. Singh were ready for operation. After one week Dr.Gupta performed the operation and assured to Mr.& Mrs. Singh about the fertility and pregnancy . After that Mrs. Sing was pregnant and gave birth to male child.
When that son was fourth year, Mr. and Mrs. Singh wanted another child and again they approach to Government Hospital But at that time Dr. Sarma who was the Gynecologist .Mr. and Mrs. Singh meet with him and told past story about their first child.
So Dr.Sarma suggested that some second chance, after some medical examination Dr. Sarma came to conclusion that Mr. Singh was not able for procreate the child due to Anti- sperm antibodies .
Dr Sarma told that fact to the couple .They were very shocked so Mr. Singh showed all reports of Medical Examination which was made by Dr.Gupta to Dr. Sarma. After examining all the reports which was tested by Dr. Gupta , he concludes that , he was either cheated or his wife was pregnant by some other person .
He was very shocked and suspected on his wife character , But Mrs.Singh very sure about her purity . She approached Dr.Gupta , who is doing private practice in his hospital, for clarification.
When Mrs. Singh asked about her child , Dr.Gupta did not give satisfactory answer but after some force and compulsion he told that , Mr. Singh was incompetent so he had done test tube process on her womb without taking his and her consent . He also said that he used semen and sperm of Mr. john . Accordingly Mr. John was real father of the child of Mrs. Singh.
During that incident one reporter who was present in Dr.Gupta’s hospital heard all story and next day he published that story in Daily News paper with name which was told by Dr.Gupta.
So Mr. John knew that fact and he approached Dr. Gupta to know the truth . After meeting Dr. Gupta he came to know that he is the father of that child . And Dr. Gupta cheated him. So John filed a criminal complaint case U/S 406 & U/S 417 of IPC for breach of trust and cheating .He also suit for custody of child. Trial court held that Dr. Gupta was not guilty U/S 406 and 417 of IPC because activity done by Dr.Gupta was in good faith so he was not punished by sessions Courts. At the same time the application for custody of child was rejected by learned District Court and held that .John was not liable for custody of child.
So John challenged the decision of Trial court before the Hon’ble High Court by filing an appeal .
Issues :
From the above facts following issues have been raised:-
1. Whether Dr.Gupta committing Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust.
2. Whether John ha right to get the custody of that child.
3. What is remedy for Mr. And Mrs. Singh.
4. Who is the Natural Guardian of that Child.
5. Whether any Constitutional Right has been breached by Dr.Gupta.
* Argue and submit written arguments on behalf of both the parties.

Follow Query

Report Abuse