Upgrad LLM

double jeopardy

business

Dear All,
A complaint was lodged under different sections of IPC and the case is still at the investigation stage even after two years of FIR. On the same facts another case is filed under Income Tax Act as a PCR to the court. As per article 20(2) of the constitution and sec 300(1) of CRPC an accused cannot even be tried for the same offence or a different offence on the same facts twice. Kindly advice me on what step is to be followed next. As this is a case of Double jeopardy. Can an application be placed before the jurisdictional court to stay the second complaint and quash the same.  The Income Tax Act being a special Law, the procedure to be followed is as per the Special Act. What is the position of sec.5 of CRPC being a saving clause in this regard. Kindly advice.
Regards,
Vishwanath



Attached File : 142450141 no double prosecution for same facts-1.doc downloaded 48 times
 
Reply   
 
Advocate/Legal Consultant (rpchughadvocatesupremecourt@hotmail.com)

Art. 20(1) and S.300 provide the rule of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict - which means that a person cannot be tried more than one time for the same offence. It does not in the least imply that a single act or ommission cannot fall within the ambit of more than one offence. The same act can fall within different sections in one act or different acts altogether. He can be tried together of such acts. For eg : the same act of a woman leaving out her child in the forest can attract 200(3) as well as 317 IPC. In such a case there is no bar on trial or proseuction however at the time of punishment S.31 (CrPC) provides that the person is to be convicted only of the gravest of the two and not both.
 
Reply   
 


Advocate/Legal Consultant (rpchughadvocatesupremecourt@hotmail.com)

Provisions relating to double jeopardy are not at all attracted here. Same act or ommission of a person can lead to liability under different provisions of one act, or differnet acts altogether. Although he can be convicted only of the gravest of the two. For complette undertstanding read SS. 220/31 CrpC.

 
Reply   
 
director

please also refer a case decided by Supreme Court recently after decideding the case of Kolla Veera Raghav Rao v. Gorantla Venkateswara Rao, about this issue, please also refer that case Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 23 April, 2012. Please let  know me as well as other members of this club, in opinion of the learned member of this club, with great respect to judiciary, which one should be held decided correctly if refer to a larger bench.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x