Supreme Court of India

Kolla Veera Raghav Rao v Gorantla Venkateswara Rao

(2011) 2 SCC 70320111 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
The appellant was convicted under S.138 NI Act for a dishonoured cheque. A complaint under S.420 IPC was then filed against him on the same facts.
Issue
Whether the second prosecution was barred by S.300(1) CrPC.
Held
S.300(1) CrPC is wider than Article 20(2): while a conviction stands, it bars a second trial not only for the same offence but also, on the same facts, for any other offence for which a different charge could have been made. The S.420 prosecution on the same facts was barred and quashed.
Principle
S.300(1) CrPC (now S.337(1) BNSS) bars a second trial on the same facts even for a different offence.
Cite this

Facts

  • The appellant was convicted under S.138 NI Act for a dishonoured cheque. A complaint under S.420 IPC was then filed against him on the same facts.

Issue

  1. Whether the second prosecution was barred by S.300(1) CrPC.

Held

  • S.300(1) CrPC is wider than Article 20(2): while a conviction stands, it bars a second trial not only for the same offence but also, on the same facts, for any other offence for which a different charge could have been made. The S.420 prosecution on the same facts was barred and quashed.

Cite this

Citation

Kolla Veera Raghav Rao v Gorantla Venkateswara Rao (2011) 2 SCC 703

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/640825/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.