https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170863 A subsequent prosecution is barred only where the later case is for the same offence, or for offences sharing identical essential ingredients; where the earlier case concerned misappropriation and corruption and the later case arose from distinct customs and gold-control violations based on different facts, the plea under Article 20(2) and Section 403 failed. Delay and alleged prejudice did not justify quashing serious economic and customs-related proceedings, because lapse of time alone is not enough to invoke inherent powers absent a stronger legal infirmity. The challenge to the second prosecution therefore failed, and the convictions and sentences remained undisturbed. en-us Mon, 28 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jun 2015 18:10:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170863 A subsequent prosecution is barred only where the later case is for the same offence, or for offences sharing identical essential ingredients; where the earlier case concerned misappropriation and corruption and the later case arose from distinct customs and gold-control violations based on different facts, the plea under Article 20(2) and Section 403 failed. Delay and alleged prejudice did not justify quashing serious economic and customs-related proceedings, because lapse of time alone is not enough to invoke inherent powers absent a stronger legal infirmity. The challenge to the second prosecution therefore failed, and the convictions and sentences remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 28 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170863