Rules Against Double Jeopardy скачать в хорошем качестве

Rules Against Double Jeopardy

#sachinkumarpingle #feelthelife #rules #doublejeopardy Rule against Double Jeopardy According to the provisions of S.- 300, a person who has been once tried by court of competent jurisdiction for any offence, and in that trial, either convicted or acquittal, such person shall not be liable during such conviction or acquitted, remaining in force, to be tried against, for the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge might have been made. However, it is also provided that, such person may afterwards, be tried for any distinct offence for which a separate charge might have been made against him at the previous trial. However, this can be done only with the consent of the state Govt. Analysis From the above discussion, it is clear that, S.- 300 of Cr.P.C. Prohibits the retrial of a particular person, if such person has been once tried by the competent court. Further, such retrial has been prohibited during the period in which the acquittal or conviction in the previous trial remains in force. So also such retrial has been prohibited even if, different charge might have been made against such person on the same facts and for the same offence. However, it is to be noted that, such retrial can be taken, if the State Govt. sanctions it. In this connection provisions of S.- 300(3) are to be noted. It lays down that, if a person is convicted of an offence which is constituted by any act causing consequences, which together with such act, constitutes a different offence than one, for which he was conviction, then such person may afterwards be tried for such second mentioned offence, if the consequence of the main offensive act had not happened or not known to the court, at the time, when he was so convicted. Similarly, it is to be remembered that, a person who has been discharge vide S.- 258 of Cr.P.C. can not be tried against for the same offence. However, he can be tried again with the consent of the court, by which he was discharged or by the order of the superior court. It is also provided that, the dismissal of the complaint or discharge of an accused, does not amount to an acquittal, for the purpose of this section. From the above discussion, it will be seen that, S.-300 of Cr.P.C. Is based on the maxim ‘Nemo debet bis vexari’, which means that, a person cannot be tried for a second time for an offence, which is involved in the first offence. Therefore, in the case of Mohammad Suri-AIR-1966-S.C. P.64, Supreme Court observed that, S.-300 of Cr.P.C. Is based on the principle that, no man’s life or liberty shall be put twice in jeopardy for the same offence on the same set of facts. Conditions for applicability of S.-300 In order to apply provisions of S.-300 of Cr.P.C. following 3 conditions must be satisfied 1) The person must have been actually tried by a competent court for the same offence of which he is charged in the second trial. 2) The person must have been convicted or acquitted in the earlier trial (dismissal of case or discharge of accused are not acquittal). 3) The conviction or acquittal must be force. This means that, such conviction or acquittal must not have been set aside by Superior court.