Double jeopardy
1Rule against double jeopardy
(1)It is not competent to charge a person who, whether on indictment or complaint (the “original indictment or complaint”), has been convicted or acquitted of an offence (the “original offence”) with—
(a)the original offence,
(b)any other offence of which it would have been competent to convict the person on the original indictment or complaint, or
(c)an offence which—
(i)arises out of the same, or largely the same, acts or omissions as gave rise to the original indictment or complaint, and
(ii)is an aggravated way of committing the original offence.
(2)Subsection (1) is subject to sections 2, 3 and 4 and is without prejudice to sections 107E(3) (prosecutor’s appeal against acquittal: authorisation of new prosecution), 118(1)(c) (disposal of appeals), 119 (provision where High Court authorises new prosecution), 183(1)(d) (stated case: disposal of appeal) and 185 (authorisation of new prosecution) of the 1995 Act.
(3)In this Act, references to a person being “convicted” of an offence are references to—
(a)the person being found guilty of the offence,
(b)the prosecutor accepting the person’s plea of guilty to the offence, or
(c)the court making an order under section 246(3) of the 1995 Act discharging the person absolutely in relation to the offence,
and related expressions are to be construed accordingly.
(4)For the purposes of subsection (3)—
(a)section 247(1) (conviction of person placed on probation or absolutely discharged deemed not to be a conviction) of the 1995 Act does not apply, and
(b)it is immaterial whether or not sentence is passed.