Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be fully migrated on 31-July-2025 at 23:59:59
After this date, all services will be available exclusively on our new platform.
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know
via our feedback form
, with specific details, so we can address them promptly.
Home
2022 (12) TMI 1415 - SC - Indian LawsMisappropriation of public funds - making false entries in the cash book and misappropriating money - misappropriation and falsification of accounts - sub-section (2) of Section 300 of the CrPC. - HELD THAT - Section 300 of the CrPC embodies the general rule which affirms the validity of the pleas of autrefois acquit (previously acquitted) and autrefois convict (previously convicted). Sub-section (1) of Section 300 lays down the rule of double jeopardy and sub-sections (2) to (5) deal with the exceptions. Accordingly so long as an order of acquittal or conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction remains in force the person cannot be tried for the same offence for which he was tried earlier or for any other offence arising from the same fact situation except the cases dealt in with under sub-sections (2) to (5) of the section - Section 300 of the CrPC is based on the maxim nemo deber bis vexari si costest curiae quod sit pro una et eadem causa which means that a person cannot be tried a second time for an offence which is involved in an offence with which he was previously charged. The whole basis for this provision is that the first trial should have been before court of competent jurisdiction. There must have been a trial of the accused that is to say that there should have been a hearing and determination or adjudication of the case on merits. Where the accused has not been tried and as such convicted or acquitted Section 300(1) shall not be applicable - Section 300 of the CrPC bars the trial of a person not only for the same offence but also for any other offence on the same facts in Thakur Ram vs. State of Bihar 1965 (11) TMI 161 - SUPREME COURT . The Trial Court has held that in the present case the allegation is that after conducting the auction of coconuts and half filled grains two-thirds of the amount collected from the successful bidder was not remitted to the treasury however in the earlier cases the allegations were that the accused misappropriated some amount to be paid to the proprietor of Agricultural Marketing Corporation Kozhikode Kerala State Coir marketing Corporation Kozhikode from the State Seed Farm Perambra by forging and falsifying records - it can be said that the present cases pertain to the same set of facts and are in respect of same offences for the same period committed in the same capacity as the previous three cases wherein the appellant herein was already prosecuted in the year 1999. The core allegation in all these five cases pertains to misappropriation by making false entries in the cash book. The allegation of the prosecution that two-thirds of the auction amount was not remitted to the treasury would be covered under the allegations of misappropriation of funds that the appellant has already been prosecuted for in the year 1999. The appellant is right in contending that the charge in the first three cases were framed on 17.08.1999 which is much after the audit and the prosecution would have been well aware of the misappropriation in respect of the present cases on 17.08.1999. The High Court was not justified in affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court - the Trial Court as well as the High Court were not right in convicting and sentencing the appellant herein and therefore the impugned judgments are liable to be set aside. Appeal allowed.
|