Whether a person can be prosecuted for the same offence twice

Karthik.T | Sastra Deemed University Thanjavur | 22nd July 2020

Maqbool Husain Vs State Of Bombay

FACTS:

The fact of this case is the petitioner bought some gold into India. He did not declare that he had bought gold with him to the customs authority at the airport. The custom authority checked him and they found that he had some amount of gold with him and they confiscated the gold under Sea Customs Act. He was later on charged for having committed an offense under the Foreign exchange Regulation Act. The petitioner contended that the second prosecution violated Article 20(2) as it was for the same offense that is for importing gold into India in contravention of government notification for which he had already been prosecuted and punished as his gold had been confiscated by the Customs Authority.

ISSUES:

Whether he will be punished for the same offense twice under the different act?

LEGAL PROVISIONS:

1. Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution
2. Sea Customs Act
3. Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.

PETITIONER CONTENTION

The petitioner contended that he had been punished for the same offense under the different activities that are he bought gold into India without saying it to anybody so the custom authority confiscated the gold and punished him under the Sea Customs Act. And after that, he had been punished for the same offense of bringing gold into India so it is violative of Article 22(2) as double jeopardy.

OBSERVATION MADE BY THE COURT:

The observed all the contention of the petitioner and held that the Sea Custom Authority changed into now no longer a courtroom docket or judicial tribunal and the adjudging of confiscation beneathneath the Sea Customs Act did not constitute a judgment of judicial character necessary to take the plea of the double jeopardy. Hence the prosecution under the foreign exchange regulation Act is barred. So the contention of the petitioner that he had been punished for the same offense twice will not come under double jeopardy under Article 22(2) of the Indian Constitution. 

JUDGMENT.       

After all the observation made by the court, the court held that the Sea custom Authority did not constitute a judgment of judicial character so it does not amount to double jeopardy. Hence his plea dismissed.