Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-10-30 allowed

State of Mizoram vs C. Sangnghina

Bench: 2 — R. Banumathi

In Brief

The State of Mizoram appealed after a Special Court and High Court refused to take cognizance of a fresh charge sheet against a public servant, holding it was barred by double jeopardy principles. The accused was initially discharged because the first prosecution sanction was issued by a non-competent authority. The Governor later issued a valid sanction. The Supreme Court held that double jeopardy does not apply when an accused is discharged before trial for procedural defects. A fresh charge sheet with valid sanction can proceed. The Court set aside the lower court orders and directed the Special Court to take cognizance and proceed with the trial.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Corruption and Public Servants Prosecution Sanction Double Jeopardy Administrative Law

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login