AapTaxLaw legal and tax information

Section 337 BNSS 2023: Person Once Convicted or Acquitted Not to Be Tried for the Same Offence

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 | Act 46 of 2023 | Updated 11 September 2026

Section 337 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) protects a person from being tried again in circumstances covered by the rule against repeated prosecution after a valid conviction or acquittal. The provision also states specific exceptions in which a later trial may still be legally permissible.

In force: The BNSS came into force on 1 July 2024, subject to the notified exception relating to the entry concerning section 106(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in the First Schedule.

Meaning and scope of Section 337 BNSS

The central rule in Section 337 is that when a person has already been tried by a court of competent jurisdiction and has been convicted or acquitted, that person ordinarily cannot be tried again for the same offence while the earlier conviction or acquittal remains in force. The restriction also extends, in the circumstances stated in the section, to another offence based on the same facts that could have been charged or for which the person could have been convicted at the first trial.

The expression is commonly associated with the principle of double jeopardy. Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India separately provides the constitutional guarantee that no person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. Section 337 BNSS operates as a procedural statutory protection and contains detailed rules and exceptions governing subsequent trials.

Section 337 BNSS - statutory text

337. Person once convicted or acquitted not to be tried for same offence.

(1) 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 under sub-section (1) of section 244, or for which he might have been convicted under sub-section (2) thereof.

(2) A person acquitted or convicted of any offence may be afterwards tried, with the consent of the State Government, for any distinct offence for which a separate charge might have been made against him at the former trial under sub-section (1) of section 243.

(3) A person convicted of any offence constituted by any act causing consequences which, together with such act, constituted a different offence from that of which he was convicted, may be afterwards tried for such last-mentioned offence, if the consequences had not happened, or were not known to the Court to have happened, at the time when he was convicted.

(4) A person acquitted or convicted of any offence constituted by any acts may, notwithstanding such acquittal or conviction, be subsequently charged with, and tried for, any other offence constituted by the same acts which he may have committed if the Court by which he was first tried was not competent to try the offence with which he is subsequently charged.

(5) A person discharged under section 281 shall not be tried again for the same offence except with the consent of the Court by which he was discharged or of any other Court to which the first-mentioned Court is subordinate.

(6) Nothing in this section shall affect the provisions of section 26 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 or of section 208 of this Sanhita.

Explanation. The dismissal of a complaint, or the discharge of the accused, is not an acquittal for the purposes of this section.

When a second trial is generally barred

Requirement Effect under Section 337
Earlier trial by a court of competent jurisdiction The protection is tied to a prior judicial trial by a court legally competent to try the offence.
Conviction or acquittal remains in force A fresh trial for the same offence is ordinarily barred while the prior result remains effective.
Same facts and an alternative charge that could have been made The bar can extend beyond an identically worded charge where the requirements of sub-section (1) are satisfied.

Important exceptions under Section 337

1. Distinct offence with State Government consent

Under sub-section (2), a later trial may be held for a distinct offence for which a separate charge could have been made at the former trial, but the consent of the State Government is required.

2. Later consequence creates a different offence

Sub-section (3) permits a later trial when an act subsequently produces a consequence that forms a different offence, provided that consequence had not occurred, or was not known to the court, at the time of the earlier conviction.

3. First court lacked competence to try the later offence

Under sub-section (4), a later prosecution may be possible for another offence arising from the same acts where the court that conducted the first trial was not competent to try the later offence.

4. Discharge is treated differently from acquittal

A person discharged under Section 281 BNSS cannot ordinarily be tried again for the same offence without the consent required by sub-section (5). The Explanation further clarifies that dismissal of a complaint or discharge of the accused is not an acquittal for the purposes of Section 337.

Illustrations under Section 337

  1. A is tried on a charge of theft as a servant and is acquitted. While that acquittal remains in force, A cannot again be charged on the same facts with theft as a servant, theft simpliciter, or criminal breach of trust.
  2. A is convicted of causing grievous hurt. If the injured person later dies, A may be tried for culpable homicide.
  3. A is convicted by a Court of Session for the culpable homicide of B. A cannot later be tried on the same facts for the murder of B.
  4. A is convicted by a Magistrate of the first class for voluntarily causing hurt to B. A ordinarily cannot later be tried on the same facts for voluntarily causing grievous hurt to B unless the case falls within sub-section (3).
  5. A is convicted by a Magistrate of the second class for theft of property from the person of B. A may later be charged with and tried for robbery on the same facts where the first court lacked competence to try the later offence.
  6. A, B and C are convicted by a Magistrate of the first class for robbing D. They may later be charged with and tried for dacoity on the same facts where the statutory conditions for a later trial are satisfied.

Section 337 BNSS and Section 300 CrPC

Section 337 BNSS corresponds substantially to the rule previously contained in Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The BNSS updates the internal cross-references to provisions of the new Sanhita, including Sections 243, 244 and 281.

Practical point: A plea based on Section 337 requires careful comparison of the earlier and later offences, the facts underlying both prosecutions, the competence of the first court, the legal effect of the earlier order, and whether any statutory exception applies.

Related legal provisions

Official legal resources

This page is intended for legal information and statutory reference. Application of Section 337 depends on the facts, charges, prior proceedings and orders in the individual case.