A is a charged with murder. At his trial, the judge considers that there is no sufficient evidence against A, including a lack of evidence that A was even at the scene, and delivers a verdict of acquittal. The police are frustrated by this and conduct further searches and testing at the scene. They are able to recover some finger prints, which they say match those of A. Can A be tried again for murder?

All India Bar Examination (AIBE) 3-III Previous Year Question Papers with Answers

Practice Mode:

42.

A is a charged with murder. At his trial, the judge considers that there is no sufficient evidence against A, including a lack of evidence that A was even at the scene, and delivers a verdict of acquittal. The police are frustrated by this and conduct further searches and testing at the scene. They are able to recover some finger prints, which they say match those of A. Can A be tried again for murder?

Principle :

A person who has once been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction for an offence and convicted or acquitted of such offence shall, while such conviction or acquittal remains in force, not be liable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have been made.

A: Yes, A can be tried again, because of the discovery of new evidence.

B: No, A cannot be tried again, because that would amount to trying A again for the same offence.

C: No. A cannot be tried again, but A can be tried for culpable homicide because of the new evidence.

D: Yes, A can be tried again, but only if the police or prosecution first have the initial acquittal quashed.

E: No, A cannot be tried again, but once the acquittal is quashed. A can be tried for culpable homicide.

The answer is: B

<< Previous Question

Next Question >>

Explanation

The correct option is B: No, A cannot be tried again, because that would amount to trying A again for the same offence.

This is because, according to the principle, a person who has been acquitted of an offence by a court of competent jurisdiction cannot be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts for any other offence. This is known as the rule of double jeopardy, which is enshrined in Article 20 (2) of the Constitution of India and Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The rule of double jeopardy is based on the maxim "nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa", which means "no one should be vexed twice for the same cause". The rule aims to protect the accused from harassment and oppression by the state, and to ensure finality and certainty in criminal proceedings.

The discovery of new evidence does not justify a retrial of A for murder, as that would violate the rule of double jeopardy. The Supreme Court of India has held that once a person has been acquitted by a competent court, he cannot be tried again even if fresh evidence is found or a higher court finds fault with the acquittal. The only exception to this rule is when the acquittal is set aside by a superior court in appeal or revision, and a retrial is ordered by the same court. However, in this case, there is no indication that the acquittal of A has been challenged or quashed by a higher court. Therefore, A cannot be tried again for murder based on the new evidence.