Moot Court Memo
Moot Court Memo
Moot Court Memo
(2022-23)
BEFORE
IN THE MATTER OF
VERSUS
NEELAM…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
NINDHYA……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
NEPENTHUS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA……………………………………………………...……………………………………………………..RESPONDENT
Hon’ble Honorable
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The petitioner in the present case has approached the hon’ble Supreme Court of Bindia to initiate
the present public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of Bindia . The
petitioner most humbly and respectfully submit to the jurisdiction of the hon’ble Supreme Court
in the present matter.
Article 32
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or
clauses (1) and (2), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise
within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by
In the country of Bindia , the concept of surrogacy initiated nearly two decades ago. The
unethical business of surrogacy raised a demand for a law to regulate surrogacy practices in
Bindia and the so passed Surrogacy Regulation Act 2021 , though being a commendable step ,
equally has attracted criticisms upon the inefficiencies of its provisions. Nepenthes an NGO
concerned about the shortcomings of this act , which does not allow the surrogate mother to be
provided with any monetary aid , prohibits same-sex couples , live in couples from availing
surrogacy , specifies age criteria for the surrogate mother which invades their right to privacy. So
the NGO has approached the hon'ble Supreme court of Bindia filing a public interest litigation
challenging these provisions that are said to be violative of the basic structure of the Constitution
of Bindia.
Along with this case , three other similar surrogacy related petitions are to be heared in the
Hon'ble Supreme court of Bindia.
Anil(37) and Ankruta(29) , a live in couple wishing for a child made Neelam(33) a widow with a
son , beleive that they were married , paid 2 lakh and convinced her to be surrogate mother. After
the delivery the child was not handed over by Neelam and the couple filed a petition for the
custody of the child , in the Hon'ble high court of Mica.
Suraj() and Nindhya() a married couple , are declared to be infertile . As the procedures for
adoption are complicated they were hopeless. Suraj was arrested on April 2020 , was convicted
and is needed to undergo a prison term of 10 years. After which Nindhya applied for surrogacy
and her application was rejected on the grounds of ineligiblity of her husband as per Surrogacy
Regulation Act , 2021 and prison rules . Nindhya filed a petition in the Hon'ble high court of
Tina questioning the ban on their right to have a child through Surrogacy.
Viroosh and Dhroop , two gay men desires to have a child of their own , and to extend their
families . Since the Surrogacy Regulation Act 2021 doesn't have any provisions for them to have
a surrogate child , they approached the Hon'ble high court of Oria challenging the provisions
which only allows married couples of opposite sex to avail the option of surrogacy.
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
ISSUE 1
Whether the Provisions of The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 to the extent of
constitutionally valid?
ISSUE 2
Whether the Provisions of The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 expands its
ISSUE 3
Whether the age limit prescribed for men and women in the said Act reinforced the
ISSUE 4
Whether the vaccum in The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 had incapacitated and