Pranay Inani, Gujarat National Law University
Ishaan Uday, Gujarat National Law University
Introduction
The principle of double jeopardy, encapsulated in the ancient legal maxim "Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa" (no one should be tried twice for the same cause), stands as a fundamental pillar of criminal justice systems worldwide. This venerable concept, with roots tracing back to ancient Greek and Roman law, has evolved into a crucial safeguard against the abuse of state power and a cornerstone of individual rights protection. This research paper delves deeply into the intricate tapestry of double jeopardy as it manifests in the Indian legal system, exploring its historical evolution, constitutional enshrinement, and statutory implementation.
In India, the principle of double jeopardy finds its most elevated expression in Article 20(2) of the Constitution, which declares, "No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once." This constitutional guarantee, however, represents only the tip of the iceberg. A more comprehensive and nuanced articulation of double jeopardy protection lies within Section 300(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which extends the principle to cover both convictions and acquittals and even precludes trials for different offenses arising from the same set of facts.
This apparent discrepancy between the constitutional provision and its statutory counterpart raises intriguing questions about the scope, interpretation, and practical application of double jeopardy protection in India. How do these seemingly divergent provisions coexist within the legal framework? What role does judicial interpretation play in reconciling these differences?
Comentarios