Explanation of CrPC Section 403

Persons Once Convicted or Acquitted Not to Be Tried for the Same Offence

Section 403 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) of Pakistan is a critical provision that ensures double jeopardy protection for individuals who have been acquitted or convicted of a crime. It prevents a person from being tried again for the same offense or on the same facts for a different offense unless certain exceptions apply.

The section establishes several important principles and exceptions related to retrial. Here's a breakdown of its provisions:

Subsection (1): General Rule of Protection Against Double Jeopardy

• Double jeopardy: A person who has already been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for a particular offense and has been either acquitted or convicted cannot be tried again for the same offense, as long as the conviction or acquittal remains in force.
• Same facts: Even if a different charge could have been made during the initial trial (as per Section 36 or Section 237), the accused cannot be tried for a different offense based on the same facts that were involved in the first trial.

Subsection (2): Trial for a Distinct Offense

• If a person has been acquitted or convicted of an offense, they can be tried for another distinct offense based on separate facts or facts that were not part of the earlier trial.
• This allows for new charges to be brought for offenses not covered in the original trial but related to the same incident.

Subsection (3): Trial for an Offense with New Consequences

• If a person is convicted for an offense that caused consequences that would form the basis of a different offense, they can be tried again for the second offense.
• This applies when the consequences of the initial offense (such as death or grievous injury) were not known or not visible at the time of the original trial. For example:
  • If a person is convicted of causing grievous hurt, and the victim later dies from the injury, the convict can be **tried for culpable homicide.

Subsection (4): Charge for Another Offense with Same Acts

• If a person is acquitted or convicted for one offense based on a set of acts, they may still be tried for another offense if the court that initially tried the case lacked jurisdiction or competence to try the second offense.
  • For instance, if a case was tried in a lower court that could not handle a more serious charge, the accused may be subsequently charged in a higher court for that serious offense.

Subsection (5): Exclusions and Clarifications

• Exclusion of dismissal or discharge: If a complaint is dismissed, proceedings are stopped, or the accused is discharged under Section 249 of the CrPC, this is not considered an acquittal for the purposes of Section 403.
  • This means that an individual who is discharged or whose complaint is dismissed can still be tried for the same offense again.

Illustrations and Examples

To clarify the law further, the section provides several illustrations to demonstrate how it applies in different circumstances:

1. Illustration (a): Same Theft Offense - No Re-trial

   • A person is tried and acquitted for theft as a servant.
   • They cannot be tried again for the same offense (theft as a servant), or even for theft generally or criminal breach of trust based on the same facts.

2. Illustration (b): Different Charge (Robbery) After Acquittal

   • A person is tried and acquitted of murder, but during the trial, it is revealed that the person actually committed robbery during the same incident.
   • They may be subsequently charged with robbery, as it is a distinct offense from murder.

3. Illustration (c): Culpable Homicide After Grievous Hurt Conviction

   • A person is convicted of causing grievous hurt to someone, and the victim later dies.
   • The convict can be tried again for culpable homicide (as the injury led to the death), even though the initial charge was grievous hurt.

4. Illustration (d): No Re-Trial for Same Facts (Culpable Homicide)

   • A person is convicted of culpable homicide (killing another person).
   • They cannot be tried for murder again based on the same facts, because both are charges related to the same crime of unlawful killing.

5. Illustration (e): No Re-Trial for Hurt and Grievous Hurt

   • A person is convicted of causing voluntary hurt.
   • They cannot be tried for grievous hurt (which is a more serious injury) based on the same facts unless the case falls under the exception in subsection (3).

6. Illustration (f): Robbery Charge After Theft Conviction

   • A person is convicted of theft from a person.
   • Later, they can be charged with robbery based on the same facts if the court concludes that the circumstances involved violence or threats.

7. Illustration (g): Dacoity After Robbery Conviction

   • Several people are convicted of robbery.
   • Later, they can be charged with dacoity (a more serious offense of organized robbery) based on the same facts if the necessary elements of dacoity (more than one person committing the crime) are present.

Conclusion

Section 403 of the CrPC provides critical protections against double jeopardy by ensuring that a person is not tried twice for the same offense or based on the same facts. However, it also allows for exceptions where a new offense arises from the same incident, or where the competence of the court in the initial trial was limited. This ensures fairness in the criminal justice system, preventing multiple trials for the same matter while providing an avenue for justice in situations where further consequences or charges emerge