Are you preparing for Rajasthan Judicial Service (R.J.S.) main examination? Here is your solved paper on criminal law and procedure for Rajasthan Judicial Service (R.J.S.) main examination held in 2005-06!
Q.1. What is difference between cognizable offence and non-cognizable offence?
Ans. Cognizable Offence:
1. Police Officer can arrest a person without warrant.
2. It is of serious nature.
Non-Cognizable Offence:
1. Police Officer cannot arrest a person without warrant.
2. It is of simple nature.
[Sections 2 (c) and 2 (1)]
Q.2. What is difference between substantive law and procedural law? Under which category law of evidence comes?
Ans. Substantive law defines and regulates rights, liabilities and powers, whereas, procedural law provides the procedure to enforce the rights and liabilities. Law of evidence comes within the ambit of a procedural Law.
Q.3. Distinguish wrongful restraint and wrongful confinement?
Ans. Wrongful Restraint:
1. Partial restraint of personal liberty.
2. Except a particular direction, a person is not prevented to proceed in any direction.
Section 339, Indian Penal Code, 1860]
Wrongful Confinement:
1. Full restraint of personal liability.
2. A person is prevented from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits.
[Section 340, Indian Penal Code, 1860]
Q.4. What is presumption of dowry-death?
Ans. If soon before her death, a woman had been subjected to cruelty, harassment or demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry-death. [Section 113-B]
Q.5. What is extra-judicial confession? Whether it should be corroborated by independent evidence?
Ans. Confession made by the accused before any person, otherwise than “Magistrate or Court”, is called “extra-judicial confession”.
It is deemed to be a weak evidence. But, whether it is weak or strong, depends upon facts, circumstances and credibility of witness.
As a matter of caution, Courts generally expect corroboration of the extra-judicial confession. [Section 24]
Q.6. (i) In summary trial, what procedure should be followed by the Court?
(ii) By whom summary trial procedure can be followed?
Ans. (i) Summons trial procedure;
(ii) Power to try summarily vests in any—
(a) Chief Judicial Magistrate;
(b) Metropolitan Magistrate; and
(c) Magistrate of first class specially empowered by the High Court. [Sections 262 and 260]
Q.7. Under what circumstances, causing miscarriage does not come within the ambit of an offence?
Ans. If such miscarriage is caused (i) in good faith; and (ii) for saving life of the woman, it is not an offence. [Section 312]
Q.8. When theft is robbery?
Ans. If, for or in committing theft, or carrying or attempting to carry stolen property, the offender voluntarily causes or attempts to cause any person’s death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death, instant hurt or instant wrongful restraint. [Section 390]
Q.9. By which modes, a Court may compel a person to attend the Court?
Ans. By:—
(1) Summons;
(2) Bailable warrant;
(3) Warrant of arrest;
(4) Warrant, in addition to summons;
(5) Attachment of the property of an absconding person; and
(6) Proclamation for the absconding person. [Sections 61, 70, 72, 82, 83 and 87]
Q.10. After issuance of a summon against the accused person, on receiving an application or complaint, when and under what provision, his personal attendance may be dispensed with by the Magistrate?
Ans. Whenever a Magistrate issues a summons, if he sees sufficient reason, may dispense with personal attendance of accused and permit him to appear by his pleader.
Q.11. Whether a major child may be entitled to get maintenance?
Ans. Yes, if such major child (not being a daughter), is due to physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself. [Section 125 (1)(c)]
Q.12. Until what time, the warrant of arrest shall remain in force?
Ans. Warrant of arrest shall remain in force until it is cancelled by the issuing Court or until it is executed. [Section 70 (2)]
Q.13. When attachment of the property of a proclaimed/absconding person can be made?
Ans. When such person is about to:
(a) dispose of the whole or any part of his property, or
(b) remove the whole or any part of his property from local jurisdiction of the Court. [Section 83 (1)]
Q.14. ‘A’ knows ‘Z’ to be behind a bush. ‘B’ does not know it. ‘A’, intending to cause or knowing it to be likely to cause Z’s death, induces ‘B’ to fire at the bush. ‘B’ fires and kills ‘Z’. Determine the legal liabilities of ‘A’ and ‘B’
Ans. ‘B’ is guilty of no offence, but ‘A’ has committed offence of culpable homicide.
[Section 299, Illustration (b), Indian Penal Code, 1860]
Q.15. ‘A’, who was a servant, aged 8 years, stole a new Parker pen, costing Rs.105/-, from the drawer of the table of his master, and he (‘A’) sold that pen for Rs.15/- to ‘B’, who was a student of B.A. (Final), aged 21 years. What offence, if any, has been committed by ‘A’ and ‘B’?
Ans. (i) ‘A’ committed theft, because he attained sufficient maturity of understanding, (ii) ‘B’ committed offence of dishonestly receiving stolen property. [Sections 378, 379/380 and 411, read with Section 83]’
Part ‘B’
Q.16. When culpable homicide is not murder? What is difference between culpable homicide and murder?
Ans. Culpable homicide is not murder, if it comes within the following exceptions of Section 300, IPC —
(1) Grave and sudden provocation;
(2) Act done in excess in exercise of the right of private defence, in good faith;
(3) offender being public servant or aiding him acting for advancement of public justice, exceeds his lawful power, in good faith;
(4) Sudden fight in heat of passion; and
(5) Death of person above 18 years is caused who suffers death or takes risk of death of his own consent.
Culpable Homicide:
A person is liable for culpable homicide, when his act, which caused death was—
(i) with intention to cause death of other person,
(ii) with intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or
(iii) with knowledge that he is likely to cause death. [Section 299]
Murder:
Except the exceptions, a person is liable for culpable homicide amounting to murder, when his act, which caused death was—
(i) with intention to cause death of other person,
(ii) with intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause death of the person to whom the harm is caused,
(iii) with intention of causing bodily injury to any person and such bodily injury inflicted was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or
(iv) If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death. [Section 300]
Q.17. Define criminal misappropriation. What is difference between criminal misappropriation and criminal breach of trust?
Ans. Whoever dishonestly uses moveable property of any other person or converts to his own use, is called “criminal misappropriation” of property. [Section 403]
Criminal Misappropriation:
1. It can be done only for moveable property.
2. From the very beginning of the offence, the offender gets the property dishonestly or illegally; or the property coincidently comes in possession of the offender.
3. Criminal misappropriation can only be done by the offender himself.
4. There is no fiduciary relations between the offender and the owner of the property. [Section 403]
Criminal Breach of Trust:
1. It can be done for moveable and immoveable properties both.
2. In the beginning, the property is validly entrusted, but later on, breach of trust is done.
3. In criminal breach of trust, the property can be dishonestly entrusted to any other person also.
4. There is always fiduciary relations between the offender and the owner of the property. [Section 405]
Q.18. What is meant by common object? How it is distinct from common intention?
Ans. When any member of an unlawful assembly commits certain offence in furtherance of the common object of such assembly, it is called commission of the offence in prosecution of the “common object”.
Common Object:
1. For prosecution of common object, formation of unlawful assembly is necessary.
2. Assembly of five or more persons is necessary.
3. Being a member of an unlawful assembly, is, in itself, an offence.
4. At the time of assembling, such assembly need not be unlawful, but, later on, it may convert into an unlawful assembly. Pre-meeting of minds is not its sine qua non.
5. If, in furtherance of common object, offence is committed by one member, each member of the unlawful assembly is held guilty. [Section 141]
Common Intention:
1. For common intention formation of unlawful assembly is not necessary.
2. Assembly of five or more persons is not necessary. It is sufficient if there are more than one persons.
3. Common intention, in itself, does not create any offence.
4. For common intention, pre-meeting of minds is its essential ingredient.
5. If offence is committed by one member in furtherance of common intention, the co-accused is also held liable. [Section 34]
Q.19. What do you understand by “confession”? How does the Court record a confession?
Ans. Voluntary admission of the guilt or the elements forming the guilt, is called “confession”, which is relevant in criminal proceedings. [Section 24]
Any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate, whether having jurisdiction or not, may record confession, during investigation or before commencement of inquiry or trial.
The Magistrate shall, before recording any such confession, explain to the person making it that he is not bound to make a confession and that it may be used as evidence against him; and the Magistrate shall not record such confession unless, upon questioning the person making it, he has reason to believe that it is being made voluntarily. [Sec. 164]
Q.20. Under Section 498-A, Indian Penal Code, how “cruelty” has been defined? Whether this offence is compoundable?
Ans. If the husband or relative of the husband of a woman, by his conduct or act, willfully subjects her to commit suicide, causes grave injury; endangers to life, limb; or mental/physical health of the woman; harasses; or unlawfully demands any property or valuable security, is called “cruelty”. Aforesaid offence is not compoundable. [Section 498-A]
Q.21. What is meant by accomplice? A conviction is not illegal merely because it has been based on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. Explain.
Ans. When a person participates, aids or abets the commission an offence, he is called “accomplice”.
Under Section 133, Evidence Act, an accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
Whereas, Illustration (b) of Section 114, provides that an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars.
But, the aforesaid provisions are not self-contradictory. While interpreting the provisions of Section 133, the Courts should take the precaution provided in the provisions of Illustration (b) of Sectionll4, Evidence Act.
Its interpretation has been made by Hon’ble Supreme Court as under:
It is necessary that the testimony of an accomplice should be corroborated by other independent evidence. [See: Madan Mohan vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1970 SC 1005]
Conviction cannot be based on the uncorroborated testimony of an approver. [See: Niranjan Singh vs. State of Punjab, 1996 (2) Crimes 251 (SC)] [Sections 133 and 114]
Q.22. What are privileged communications? When can they be claimed as a matter of right?
Ans. For privileged communications, no person shall be permitted or compelled to disclose such communication.
Kinds of privileged communications:
(1) Communications during marriage;
(2) Communications as to affairs of State;
(3) Official communications;
(4) Professional communications between legal advisers and clients; and
(5) Communications as to crimes.
Communication during marriage can only be permitted to be disclosed as right, when the legal proceedings are between the parties to the marriage.
Evidence as to affairs of State can be permitted by the competent officer at the Head of the Department.
Keeping in view the public interests, disclosure of the official communications may refused.
Any communication between the legal advisor and client has not been protected from disclosure if such communication has been made in furtherance of any illegal purpose. [Sections 122 to 126]
Q.23. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, who are entitled to get maintenance allowance? When such orders may be varied or cancelled?
Ans. The following persons are entitled to get maintenance:—
(a) wife, unable to maintain herself; or
(b) legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself; or
(c) legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself; or
(d) father or mother, unable to maintain himself/herself. [Section 125] Where it appears to the Magistrate that due to change in the circumstances, any order made under Section 125 should be changed, he may cancel or vary it. [Section 127]
Q.24. What are provisions relating to sentence in cases of conviction of several offences at one trial?
Ans. When a person is convicted at one trial of several offences, the Court may, subject to provisions of Section 71, IPC, (i) sentence him for such offences, to the several punishments prescribed therefor which such Court is competent to inflict; (ii) Such punishments when consisting of imprisonment to commence the one after the expiration of the other in such order as the Court may direct, unless the Court directs that such punishment shall run concurrently; (iii) in case of consecutive sentences, it shall not be necessary for the Court by reason only of the aggregate punishment for the several offences being in excess of the punishment which it is competent to inflict on conviction of a single offence, to send the offender for trial before a higher Court; (iv) in no case shall such person be sentenced to imprisonment for a longer period than fourteen years; and (v)the aggregate punishment shall not exceed twice which that Court is competent to inflict for a single offence. [Section 31]
Q.25. ‘A’, with intention to commit theft of ornaments, enters the house of ‘B’, and when after breaking the box, he opens it, he gets no ornament in the box. What offence has been committed by ‘A’ and how much sentence can be inflicted on him?
Ans. ‘A’ has committed the offences of (i) house-trespass in order to commission of an offence (theft) punishable with imprisonments; and (ii) attempt to theft.
Punishments:
(i) For offence under Section 451, IPC, the punishment prescribed for house-trespass for theft is seven years imprisonment, with fine.
(ii) For offence under Section 380, IPC, the punishment prescribed for it is seven years and fine, for the theft in a residential building. Since, the present case relates to “attempt to theft”, so, ‘A’ is liable to half of the quantum of the aforesaid period of imprisonment, with fine, under Section 380/511, IPC.
Part ‘C’
Q.26. (a) When theft and extortion are robbery? What is difference between theft, extortion and robbery?
(b) ‘A’ puts a bait for dog in his pocket, and thus induces Z’s dog to follow it. What offence, if any, has been committed by ‘A’?
Ans. Theft is “robbery” if, in order to the committing of the theft or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
Extortion is “robbery” if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, includes the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted. [Section 390]
Differences between theft, extortion and robbery are as under:
Theft:
1. Subject-matter of theft is taken or removed without consent of the person having possession.
2. There is no element of fear.
3. Theft can be committed only of moveable property.
4. There is no use of force. [Section 378]
Extortion:
1. Subject-matter of extortion is received by un-illegal means with consent of the owner or person in possession of such property.
2. There is element of fear.
3. Extortion can be committed of moveable and/or immoveable property.
4. Victim of extortion is put in fear and compelled to deliver the property. [Section 383]
Robbery:
1. Subject-matter of robbery is received without consent of the person having possession or by illegal means.
2. There is element of fear when robbery is by extortion.
3. If robbery is committed by extortion, it can be of both moveable and immoveable property.
4. If the robbery is committed by extortion, there is element of fear/force. [Section 390]
Q.27. Define “assault”. What are its aggravated forms? What is difference between assault and criminal force?
Ans. Whoever, makes any gesture or preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who does so, is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit “assault”. [Section 351] Following are the aggravated forms of assault (or criminal force) when the assault (or criminal force) is with intention to –
(i) deter public servant from discharge of his duty;
(ii) outrage modesty of a woman;
(iii) dishonour a person;
(iv) attempt to commit theft; and
(v) attempt to wrongful confinement.
Difference between assault and criminal force:
Assault:
1. Force is not used. Merely show of force is sufficient.
2. Comparative gravity is lesser.
3. Gestures and preparations are its essential ingredients.
4. Physical touch is not necessary. [Section 351]
Criminal Force:
1. Force is used.
2. Comparative gravity is more.
3. Gestures and preparations are not its essential ingredients.
4. Physical touch is necessary. [Section 350]
Q.28. Define “estoppel”. Whether principle of estoppel applies on minors? Whether silence may operate as estoppel?
Ans. “Estoppel” has been defined as under:
When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing.
Illustration:
“A” intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to “A”, and thereby induces B to buy and pay for it.
The land afterwards becomes the property of “A”, and “A” seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his want of title. [Section 115]
Representation is essential for an estoppel. Only a competent person to enter into a contract can legally make representation. Since, a minor is not competent to enter into a contract, therefore, principles of estoppel do not apply on minors.
Mere silence does not operate as estoppel. But, when there is duty to speak, then silence operates as estoppel. Intentional silence may attract the rules of estoppel. [See: AIR 1945 Bom. 511]
Q.29. What do you understand by examination-in-chief, cross-examination and reexamination? What is meant by leading question and when leading questions may be asked?
Ans. Examination-in-chief.—The examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called his examination-in-chief.
Cross-examination.—The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called his cross-examination.
Re-examination.—The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross- examination by the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination.
Leading questions.—Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive, is called a leading question.
Leading questions can be asked in cross-examination of a witness.
Leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party, be asked in the examination-in-chief or in the re-examination, except with permission of the Court. [Sections 137, 141, 142 and 143, Indian Evidence Act, 1872]
Q.30. Describe the exceptions of defamation?
Ans. Exceptions of defamation are as follows:
(1) It is not defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person, if it be for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.
(2) It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of a public servant in the discharge of his public functions, or respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct.
(3) It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the conduct of any person touching any public question, and respecting his character, so far as his character appears in that conduct.
(4) It is not defamation to publish a substantially true report of the proceedings of a Court of Justice, or of the result of any such proceedings.
(5) It is not defamation to express in good faith any opinion whatever respecting the merits of any case, civil or criminal, which has been decided by Court, or respecting the conduct of any person as a party, witnesses or agent, in any such case, or respecting the character of such person, as far as his character appears in that conduct.
(6) It is not defamation to express in good-faith any opinion respecting the merits of any performance which its author has submitted to the judgment of the public, or respecting the character of the author so far as his character appears in such performance.
(7) It is not defamation in a person having over another any authority, either conferred by law or arising out of a lawful contract made with that other, to pass in good faith any censure oh the conduct of that other in matters to which such lawful authority relates.
(8) It is not defamation to prefer in good faith an accusation against any person to any of those who have lawful authority over that person with respect to the subject-matter of accusation.
(9) It is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another provided that the imputation be made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person making it or of any other person, or for the public good.
(10) It is not defamation to convey a caution, in good faith, to one person against another, provided that such caution be intended for the good of the person to whom it is conveyed, or of some person in whom that person is interested, or for public good. [Section 499]
Q.31. Draft a judgment convicting and sentencing the accused for the offences under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and Section 25, Arms Act?
Ans. Court of the Sessions Judge,…………… (Raj).
Presiding Officer:………… , R.H.J.S.
Sessions Case No………. /………..
State of Rajasthan vs. ‘A’ S/o ‘B’, by caste ‘C’, aged…………………. , r/o ………………….. Accused.
Present:—
Shri…….., Public Prosecutor for the State.
Shri…….., Advocate for the accused.
Accused in Person (injudicial custody)
Dated ………..
Judgment:
Learned P.P. has filed a challan against the accused under Section 302, IPC, and Section 25, Arms Act. Copies of challan-papers where supplied to the accused.
In nut-shell, the prosecution story is that on…………… (Date), at………… (Time), at……… (Place), the accused, while challenging ‘E’, committed his murder by an unlicensed 12 bore gun.
The accused was read over and explained the charge under Section 302, IPC, and Section 25, Arms Act. The accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be tried.
The prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 8………….
Statement of the accused was recorded. He produced no defence evidence.
Arguments were heard and record was carefully perused.
PW. 1 Smt……., widow of the deceased, lodged an FIR (Exhibit P………………), at Police Station……., promptly within an hour, who herself is an eye-witness. She deposed that the accused called her husband ‘Z’ to come out of the house. When ‘Z’ came out, the accused asked as to how he dared to contest the election of Sarpanch against him and further warned ‘Z’ to withdraw his candidature. But when ‘Z’ bodily refused, the accused became angry and shot dead ‘A’ by a 12 fore unlicensed gun, which he had brought with him to threaten and kill ‘Z’. PWs. 2 to 4 (namely……………) are the eye-witnesses, who had fully corroborated the prosecution story and statement of PW. 1. They appear to be quite natural, trustworthy and true witness because they are the nearest neighbourers, belonging to different castes and religions.
PW. 5…… is a motbir witness of the site plan Ex. P…………….., arrest memo Exhibit P……, and seizure-memo of gun Exh. 3………….. According to him, the accused himself handed over the unlicensed gun to the investigating officer PW. 6 ……….., soon after the occurrence. PW 6.. I.O. corroborates the investigation.
PW. 7 Dr………. has proved the post mortem report Exhibit P…….. According to him, the hurt caused on the chest of ‘Z’ was so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause his death. PW. 8 …………… is expert witness of gun-shot injuries. According to him the gun Article 1 was used and its bullet injury was sufficient to cause death of a person.
There is no rebuttal of the aforesaid prosecution evidence by the accused. Hence, both the aforesaid charges are proved against the accused beyond doubt.
The accused, is, therefore, convicted for the offences under Section 302, IPC, and Section 25, Arms Act.
Sd/-
Session Judge…………
Heard on the question of sentence. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the following sentence is passed:—
For the offence under Section 302, IPC, the accused is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Under Section 25, Arms Act, the accused is sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Both the main sentences will run concurrently. The custody period of the accused be set off from the period of sentence.
After expiry of the period of appeal, gun Article 1 be confiscated and deposited with the District Magistrate…………..
Sd/-
Sessions Judge………..
Judgment signed and pronounced in open Court today the………………… (Date).
Seal of the Court
Sd/-
Sessions Judge…………
Q.32. (a) Prepare a draft for bail application.
(b) What is meant by “charge”? When a trial Court may add or alter the charge? Explain.
Ans. (a) Before the Sessions Court,……………. (Raj.)
Sessions Case No…………….. /2007
‘A’ s/o ‘B’, by caste ‘C’, aged 20 years, resident of…………. Applicant-accused
Versus
State of Rajasthan………………… Non-applicant
Application under Section 439, CrPC.
Offence under Section 307, IPC
May it please your honour,
The accused-applicant prays as under:
(1) That on 02/03/2007, the S.H.O., Police Station, Kotwali, Banswara arrested the accused-applicant in the campus of Government College, Banswara.
(2) That the accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated.
(3) That the accused a cancer patient.
(4) That the accused had received more number of injuries than the injured person, namely ‘X’, and out of which, one of the injuries of the accused is grievous and fatal. Since, there are no sign of injury on the neck of ‘X’ in the injury-report, therefore, no case of attempt to murder under Section 307, IPC is, prima facie made out against the applicant.
(5) That the father of the accused had died only three days back and he is the only person to look after his old widow mother.
(6) That if the accused is sent to jail, there is apprehension that in the company of habitual offenders, it will adversely affect his conduct.
(7) That there is neither any possibility that the accused will tamper with the witnesses nor will he abscond.
(8) That the accused is ready and willing to furnish bail and bonds.
It is, therefore, prayed that while accepting the application, the accused be released on bail.
sd/- ‘A’
Banswara, Accused-applicant.
Dated ………….,
(b) No definition of charge has been given in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Generally speaking, charge is a written notice to the accused by the Court stating particulars of the offence levelled against him. In the charge, name of the Court; number, year and title of the case; date, time and place of the occurrence; grounds of charge, mode of commission of offence; name of the offence; and legal sections are enumerated.
So far as adding or altering the charge is concerned, under Section 216, CrPC, it has been provided as under:
(1) The Court may, at any time before the pronouncement of the judgement, alter or add the charge.
(2) Such altered or amended charge shall be read over and explained to the accused.
(3) If the alteration or addition to a charge is such that proceeding immediately with the trial is not likely, in the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused in his defence or the prosecutor in the conduct of the case, the Court may, in its discretion, after such alteration, or addition has been made, proceed with the trial as if the altered or added charge had been the original charge.
(4) If the alteration or addition is such that proceeding immediately with the trial is likely, in the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused or the prosecutor as aforesaid, the Court may either direct a new trial or adjourn the trial for such period as may be necessary.,
(5) If the offence stated in the altered or added charge is one for the prosecution of which previous sanction is necessary, the case shall not be proceeded with until such sanction is obtained, unless sanction has been already obtained for a prosecution on the same facts as those on which the altered or added charged is founded.