Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sachin Shantilal Bhansali, ran a Pan Center in Malkapur, Buldhana. On 27/01/2014, a Food Safety Officer lodged a complaint alleging that banned Gutkha and other material were stored at the center. An FIR was registered under Sections 188, 273, 328 IPC and Section 59(iii) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act). After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed under Sections 188, 272 IPC and Section 59 FSS Act, leading to Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malkapur. The trial concluded with an acquittal on 24/08/2015, as the Magistrate found insufficient evidence. Meanwhile, on 20/01/2015, another Food Safety Officer initiated a separate criminal case (S.C.C.No.90 of 2015) before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buldhana, based on the same incident of 27/01/2014. The petitioner moved an application under Section 300 CrPC to dismiss the second case, relying on his acquittal. The Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application, leading to the present writ petition. The High Court examined the principle of autrefois acquit and Section 300 CrPC, which bars a second trial for the same offence or for any other offence based on the same facts. The Court noted that the second case was for the same incident and the same recovery of Gutkha, and the offences under the FSS Act were part of the same transaction as the IPC offences for which the petitioner was acquitted. The Court held that the second prosecution is barred under Section 300 CrPC, as the acquittal in the first trial operates as a bar. The impugned order was quashed, and S.C.C.No.90 of 2015 was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Double Jeopardy - Autrefois Acquit - Section 300 CrPC - The petitioner was acquitted in Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014 for offences under Sections 188, 272 IPC and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 arising from the same incident of recovery of Gutkha on 27/01/2014. A second case (S.C.C.No.90 of 2015) was initiated for the same incident. The Court held that the second prosecution is barred under Section 300 CrPC as the offences in both cases arose from the same transaction and the acquittal in the first trial operates as a bar. (Paras 3-10)
B) Food Safety - Prosecution under FSS Act - Same Transaction - Section 59 FSS Act - The Court found that the complaint in the second case was based on the very same incident of recovery of Gutkha on 27/01/2014, and the offences under the FSS Act were part of the same transaction as the IPC offences for which the petitioner was acquitted. Therefore, the second trial cannot proceed. (Paras 4-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a second criminal case initiated for the same incident and same set of facts, after the petitioner was acquitted in the first trial, is barred under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, and dismissed S.C.C.No.90 of 2015 as barred under Section 300 CrPC.
Law Points
- Principle of autrefois acquit
- double jeopardy
- Section 300 CrPC
- bar on second trial for same offence
- same transaction test
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (08) 74
Criminal Writ Petition No. 119 of 2020
Mr. Akshay Naik for petitioner; Mr. Sagar Ashirgade, APP for respondents
Sachin S/o Shantilal Bhansali
The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station – Malkapur City, Buldhana; Food Safety Inspector, Buldhana
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate refusing to dismiss a second criminal case on the ground of autrefois acquit under Section 300 CrPC.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of S.C.C.No.90 of 2015 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buldhana, on the ground that he had already been acquitted for the same incident.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was acquitted in Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014 for offences under Sections 188, 272 IPC and Section 59 FSS Act arising from recovery of Gutkha on 27/01/2014. A second case (S.C.C.No.90 of 2015) was initiated for the same incident, which the petitioner sought to dismiss under Section 300 CrPC.
Previous Decisions
The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Malkapur, acquitted the petitioner on 24/08/2015 in Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buldhana, dismissed the petitioner's application (Exh.19) seeking dismissal of S.C.C.No.90 of 2015.
Issues
Whether the second criminal case (S.C.C.No.90 of 2015) is barred under Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, given the petitioner's acquittal in Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014 for the same incident.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the second case is based on the very same incident of 27/01/2014 and the same recovery of Gutkha, and the acquittal in the first trial operates as a bar under Section 300 CrPC.
Respondents argued that the offences under the FSS Act are distinct from the IPC offences and the second case could proceed.
Ratio Decidendi
The principle of autrefois acquit under Section 300 CrPC bars a second trial for the same offence or for any other offence based on the same facts, where the first trial resulted in acquittal. The offences in both cases arose from the same transaction, and the acquittal in the first trial operates as a bar to the second prosecution.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has invoked the principles of nemo debet bis vexari (no man shall be put twice in peril for the same offence) and autrefois acquit (the person has been acquitted on a same charge on which he is being prosecuted), embodied in Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC).
The Court found that the second case was for the same incident and the same recovery of Gutkha, and the offences under the FSS Act were part of the same transaction as the IPC offences for which the petitioner was acquitted.
Procedural History
On 27/01/2014, FIR registered against petitioner for offences under Sections 188, 273, 328 IPC and Section 59(iii) FSS Act. Charge-sheet filed under Sections 188, 272 IPC and Section 59 FSS Act, leading to Regular Criminal Case No.28 of 2014 before JMFC, Malkapur. On 24/08/2015, petitioner acquitted. Meanwhile, on 20/01/2015, another Food Safety Officer initiated S.C.C.No.90 of 2015 before CJM, Buldhana for same incident. On 09/02/2018, petitioner filed application (Exh.19) under Section 300 CrPC to dismiss second case, which was dismissed by CJM. Petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No.119 of 2020 before Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, which was allowed on 04/08/2021.
Acts & Sections
- Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: 300
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 188, 272, 273, 328
- Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006: 59, 59(iii)
