PLEA OF AUTREFOIS ACUIT AND AUTREFOIS CONVICT

ARTICLE-20(2) SECTION-300 CRPC

"Autrefois acquit" and "autrefois convict" are legal concepts that originated
in French law and are used in common law jurisdictions like India. These
pleas are related to the principle of double jeopardy, which protects
individuals from being tried or punished twice for the same offense. In the
context of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in India, these pleas are
addressed as follows:
1. Autrefois Acquit (Previously Acquitted): This plea applies when an
accused has already been acquitted of a specific offense. If acquitted
earlier, the person cannot be tried again for the same offense. This
ensures finality in judgments and protects the accused from the stress
and burden of repeated trials.
2. Autrefois Convict (Previously Convicted): This plea comes into play
when an accused has already been convicted and punished for a
particular offense. In such cases, the person cannot be tried again for
the same offense. This prevents excessive punishment and ensures
proportionality in sentencing.
the burden of proof lies with the accused to establish that the subsequent
prosecution is for the same offense for which they have already been
acquitted or convicted. The court will examine the facts and legal aspects of
both cases to determine whether the plea is valid. If the plea is accepted, the
subsequent prosecution for the same offense will be barred.

Exceptions to the Pleas

While the pleas of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict provide protection
against double jeopardy, there are certain exceptions under specific
circumstances as outlined in the CrPC. These exceptions may include:
• Situations where the previous acquittal or conviction was obtained
through fraudulent means or undue influence.
• Cases where a higher court has set aside the earlier judgment due to
legal errors or procedural irregularities.
 • Offenses involving different charges arising from the same act, where
each charge represents a distinct legal violation.
Constitutional Safeguard
Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution embodies the essence of autrefois
acquit and autrefois convict, protecting individuals from the harassment and
injustice of repeated trials and excessive punishments. It serves as a
cornerstone of a fair and just criminal justice system.
The Protection Against Double Jeopardy
The Indian Constitution, under Article 20(2), enshrines the fundamental right
against double jeopardy, which safeguards individuals from being prosecuted
and punished for the same offense more than once. This principle is closely
aligned with the doctrines of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, which
have their roots in common law.
Legal Basis: Section 300 of CrPC
Section 300 of the CrPC lays out the legal framework for these pleas. It states
that a person who has been either convicted or acquitted of an offense
cannot be tried for the same offense again, "while such conviction or
acquittal remains in force."
"Res judicata" and protection against double jeopardy-
• Res judicata applies in civil law. It means "a thing adjudged" and refers
to the principle that once a court has issued a final judgment on a
matter between the same parties, neither party can bring a lawsuit on
the same issue again. This prevents relitigating the same dispute and
ensures finality in judgments.
• Double jeopardy applies in criminal law. It protects individuals from
being tried or punished for the same offense more than once. This right
is often enshrined in constitutions (like the Fifth Amendment in the US)
and legal codes (like the CrPC in India). Double jeopardy prevents the
government from subjecting someone to the stress and hardship of
multiple trials and ensures that punishment is not imposed arbitrarily.
While both res judicata and protection against double jeopardy aim to
prevent duplicative legal actions, they apply in different legal contexts. Res
judicata pertains to civil cases and prevents relitigation of the same issue or
claim between parties, while protection against double jeopardy applies to
criminal cases and prevents multiple prosecutions or punishments for the
same offense.
CASE LAWS-
Autrefois Acquit (Previously Acquitted)
• State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh (1967): In this case, the Supreme Court
held that the principle of autrefois acquit applies even if the accused
was acquitted on technical grounds, as long as the acquittal was valid
and subsisting.
• Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh (1996): The Himachal Pradesh High
Court ruled that the plea of autrefois acquit would not be available if
the previous acquittal was based on a mistake of fact or law.
• State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Govind Pethe (2009): The Bombay
High Court emphasized that the plea of autrefois acquit is not available
if the previous acquittal was obtained through fraud or collusion.
Autrefois Convict (Previously Convicted)
• Mohan Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1964): The Supreme Court held
that the plea of autrefois convict applies even if the accused was
convicted by a court of inferior jurisdiction, as long as the conviction
was valid and subsisting.
• State of Punjab v. Hardial Singh (1971): The Punjab and Haryana High
Court ruled that the plea of autrefois convict would not be available if
the previous conviction was set aside by a higher court on appeal.
• State of Gujarat v. Natvarlal Bhagwanlal Desai (2003): The Gujarat High
Court emphasized that the plea of autrefois convict is not available if
the previous conviction was obtained through a confession induced by
coercion or torture.
The pleas of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, deeply rooted in both the
Indian Constitution and the CrPC, serve as essential safeguards against
double jeopardy, ensuring that individuals are not subjected to the injustice
of repeated trials and excessive punishments. These principles uphold the
fundamental rights of the accused and promote a fair and just criminal justice
system.