Double jeopardy is prohibited under the general law, Section 26 of the General Clauses Act, and Article 20(2) of the Constitution. A person cannot be punished twice for the same offence.

R.P.Sethi, J.

1. This order will dispose of CWP Nos. 3081, 1390, 1395, 1566, 4833, 6447, 6369 and 7150 of 1996 as the question of law involved in all the cases is common.

2. Alleged to have been subjected to double jeopardy, the petitioners have prayed for quashment of the impugned orders by which they have been placed under suspension, charge-sheeted and are being dealt with, with the object of awarding punishment. The action of the respondents is alleged to be contrary to the provisions of Section 26 of the General Clauses Act and the guarantee of fundamental rights was enshrined in Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India.

3. All the petitioners are the conductors of Punjab Roadways who are alleged to have violated the provisions of law by allowing various passengers to travel in their buses without tickets. After checking, they were fined on the spot by the Inspectors of the respondents vide various orders attached with the writ petitions. The fines imposed are admitted to have been paid by the erring petitioners, after imposition of fines, the petitioners were suspended and served with impugned charge sheets.

4. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the facts as stated by the petitioners have been admitted. It is, however, submitted that the impugned orders are valid, legal and according to law and are not contrary to Section 26 of the General Clauses Act for in violation of the guarantee as enshrined in Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that the petitioners were earlier dealt with under Section 178 of the Motor Vehicles Act, which according to the respondents, was a criminal prosecution and the action now sought to be taken was in accordance with the service rules applicable in the case of taking administrative action.

5. The maxim Nemo debet bis puniri pro uno delicto means that no one should be punished twice for one fault. A decision of a competent Court upon a given set of facts is a bar to any subsequent prosecution on the same facts. In other words it means that no man ought to be vexed twice if it is proved to the court that the proposed action was for one and the same cause. No person should be twice sued or twice prosecuted upon one and the same set of facts.

6. It is acknowledged principle of a civilized society that if a person is made to undergo punishment more than once for the same offence, he would be subjected to harassment which shall be against the public policy. Section 26 of the General Clauses Act prohibits double punishment for the same offence or cause. The need of the section arises out of multiple criminal laws and its object is to enact a rule regarded as adequately dealing with the legal issues for not subjecting a citizen to double jeopardy. The protection against double jeopardy could be enjoyed under the common law but was given a constitutional status in the country under Article 20(2) of the Constitution.

7. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as the petitioners were earlier convicted of a criminal offence, the respondents were justified in initiating disciplinary action against them in accordance with the service rules applicable. The submission is without substance in as much as the record reveals that the petitioners were never subjected to prosecution. The, petitioners, therefore, could not be held to be accused of an offence in the proceedings in which they were fined for carrying passengers without tickets. The perusal of the documents produced clearly shows that the petitioners after being apprehended were subjected to fines by the Inspectors of the respondents to different amounts. "Person accused of any offence and prosecuted" denotes a person against whom a formal accusation of commission of an offence has been made. Such formal accusation may be specifically made against him in an FIR or a formal complaint or any other formal document or notice served on that person, which ordinarily results in his prosecution in