Case Details

Citation(s)
1995 SLG 643 1995 SLD 643 = 1995 SCMR 626
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 224 of 1987, decision dated: 13-04-1991.
NASIM HASAN SHAH, RUSTAM S. SIDHWA AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL LONE, JJ
K.M.A. Samdani and Salim Sahgal, Advocates Supreme Court instructed by Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate on-Record for Appellants. S.D. Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Akhtar, Advocate, AA. G., Punjab instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and othersvsTHE STATE

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13(a)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 403(1)

Law: General Clauses Act (X of 1897)

Section: 26

Law: Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302/149

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 13(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 403(1) General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S. 26 Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/149 �Maxim: "Nemo bis puniture aut vexatur pro eodurn deticio" (no one is to be twice vexed for one and the same offence) Validity Rule that no man shall be vexed twice for the same offence Application Rule of "autrefois acquit" and rule of "auterefois convict" Protection given by Art, 13(a), Constitution of Pakistan (1973) is against prosecution and double punishment Constitutional guarantee is available only if the accused is convicted and punished and if the first prosecution results in acquittal, the second prosecution is not prohibited �Rule of double jeopardy, however, is found in S. 403(1), Cr.P.C. which prohibits the second trial for an offence during course of existence of conviction or acquittal of a person as the case may be, in consequence of final adjudication of such an offence by a Court of competent jurisdiction Rule against autrefois acquit finds place in S. 403(1), Cr.P.C. and the counterpart of the said rule "autrefois convict" has received recognition in the Constitutional guarantee embodied in Art. 13(a), Constitution of Pakistan (1973) If one trial ends in conviction and punishment and in the second case accused is acquitted, and the two s are placed in juxtaposition and it becomes evident that the of conviction in point of time is rendered first, of conviction will hold the field Subsequent acquittal of accused thus cannot reflect upon his conviction and sentence awarded to him on the basis of the trial Provisions of S. 26, General Clauses Act, 1897, does not debar the simultaneous prosecution but prohibits duplicate punishment and not the trial.The rule that no one shall be vexed twice for the same offence has its roots in the ancient maxim "Nemo bis puniture aut vexature pro eodum delico" which means that no one should be subjected to peril twice for the same offence. It is a fundamental rule of Criminal Law that no one should be exposed to hazards of punishment and convicted twice for one and the same offence. This doctrine is enshrined deeply in the legal system of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register