Kolla Veera Raghav
Rao Vs Gorantla Venkateswara Rao & ANR.
O R D E R
counsel for the parties. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment
and order dated 07th October, 2005 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh
in Criminal Appeal No. 1581 of1999 and Criminal Revision Case No. 312 of 1999. The
facts have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating
the same here except wherever necessary. Learned counsel for the appellant
submitted that the appellant was already convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and hence he could not be again tried or punished on the
same facts under Section 420or any other provision of IPC or any other statute.
We find force in this submission. It may be noticed that there is a difference
between the language used in Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India and
Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C.. Article 20(2) states: "no person shall be
prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once." CRIMINAL
APPEAL NO. 1160 OF 2006
On the other hand,
Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C. States: "300. Person once convicted or acquitted
not to be tried for same office__ (1) A person who has once been tried by a Court
of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such
offence shall, while such conviction or acquittal remains in force, not be
liable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts for any
other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might
have been made under sub- section (1) of section 221 or for which he might have
been convicted under sub-section (2) thereof." Thus, it can be seen that
Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C.is wider than Article 20(2) of the Constitution. While,
Article 20(2) of the Constitution only states that 'no one can be prosecuted
and punished for the same offence more than once', Section 300(1) of Cr.P.C.
states that no one can be tried and convicted for the same offence or even for a
different offence but on the same facts. In the present case, although the offences
are different but the facts are the same. Hence, Section 300(1)of Cr.P.C. applies.
Consequently, the prosecution under Section 420, IPC was barred by Section
300(1) of Cr.P.C. The Appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment of the High
Court is set aside.
[GYAN SUDHA MISRA]
01, 2011 ;