https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199644 Section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure bars a subsequent trial only where the earlier proceeding ended in a valid conviction or acquittal by a court of competent jurisdiction. An order of acquittal made by a court that itself considered it lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance has no legal effect for that purpose and is a nullity. Article 20 double jeopardy protection does not extend to such an incompetent proceeding. The fact that charge was framed and evidence recorded did not cure the jurisdictional defect, so the later trial and conviction were not barred. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:52:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199644 Section 403 of the Code of Criminal Procedure bars a subsequent trial only where the earlier proceeding ended in a valid conviction or acquittal by a court of competent jurisdiction. An order of acquittal made by a court that itself considered it lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance has no legal effect for that purpose and is a nullity. Article 20 double jeopardy protection does not extend to such an incompetent proceeding. The fact that charge was framed and evidence recorded did not cure the jurisdictional defect, so the later trial and conviction were not barred. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Mar 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199644