Double jeopardy does not bar a fresh prosecution when the earlier proceeding was void for lack of mandatory sanction.

A fresh prosecution was not barred where the earlier criminal proceedings had been quashed as void for want of mandatory sanction and lack of jurisdiction to take cognizance. A proceeding without the required sanction was not a trial by a court of competent jurisdiction, so section 403(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 did not apply because there had been no prior valid conviction or acquittal remaining in force. Article 20(2) of the Constitution also did not apply, as the earlier null proceedings did not amount to a prosecution and punishment for the same offence more than once. The mandatory sanction requirement could not be displaced by provisions dealing with cognizance or irregular trials.

---

---

Issues: Whether a second prosecution was barred by Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India and section 403(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, when the earlier criminal proceedings had been quashed as void for want of valid sanction and want of jurisdiction to take cognizance.

Analysis: The earlier proceedings were held to be invalid because the mandatory sanction required by section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 had not been obtained. A trial without such sanction could not be treated as a trial by a court of competent jurisdiction. Section 403(1) applies only where there has been a prior trial by a competent court ending in conviction or acquittal that remains in force. Likewise, Article 20(2) is attracted only where a person is prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. The earlier proceedings having been null and void, neither safeguard barred a fresh prosecution. The references to the provisions of the Code concerning cognizance and irregular trials did not assist the petitioners because they could not override the mandatory sanction requirement.

Conclusion: The bar of double jeopardy and the protection of section 403(1) did not apply, and the fresh prosecution was valid.

---