The concept of legal protection for suspects, as stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), is based on the objective of enacting the Criminal Procedure Code, namely to foster the attitude of law enforcers based on their respective powers. Therefore, the Criminal Procedure Code provides parameters for every legal action law enforcers take. In the case of a criminal justice process, the power of the Public Prosecutor in making an Indictment is limited to a clear, accurate, and complete indictment as stipulated in Article 142 paragraph (2) letter b of the Criminal Procedure Code. The violation of the authoritative text resulted in the indictment being null and void. The problem in this research is “What is the legal status of a criminal case where the indictment was canceled through an interlocutory decision from the District Court, which was filed again with the same registration number?” This research was conducted using a normative juridical method based on secondary data through library research using a conceptual, case, and philosophical approach. The results of this study indicate that the concept of ‘null and void’ to the indictment contains the meaning of ‘never existed’ as a result of the material defects of the indictment. Thus, the prosecution process cannot use the same registration number and the same evidence.