The Charge MCQ Quiz in বাংলা - Objective Question with Answer for The Charge - বিনামূল্যে ডাউনলোড করুন [PDF]

The correct answer is Option 2.

Key PointsSection 215 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Effect of errors

• No error in stating either the offence or the particulars required to be stated in the charge, and no omission to state the offence or those particulars, shall be regarded at any stage of the case as material, unless the accused was in fact misled by such error or omission, and it has occasioned a failure of justice.

Illustration: 

• (a) A is charged under section 242 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), with "having been in possession of counterfeit coin, having known at the time when he became possessed thereof that such coin was counterfeit", the word "fraudulently" being omitted in the charge. Unless it appears that A was in fact misled by this omission, the error shall not be regarded as material.
• (b) A is charged with cheating B, and the manner in which he cheated B is not set out in the charge or is set out incorrectly. A defends himself, calls witnesses and gives his own account of the transaction. The Court may infer from this that the omission to set out the manner of the cheating is not material.
• (c) A is charged with cheating B, and the manner in which he cheated B is not set out in the charge. There were many transactions between A and B, and A had no means of knowing to which of them the charge referred, and offered no defence. The Court may infer from such facts that the omission to set out the manner of the cheating was, in the case, a material error.
• (d) A is charged with the murder of Khoda Baksh on the 21st January, 1882. In fact, the murdered person's name was Haidar Baksh, and the date of the murder was the 20th January, 1882. A was never charged with any murder but one, and had heard the inquiry before the Magistrate, which referred exclusively to the case of Haidar Baksh. The Court may infer from these facts that A was not misled, and that the error in the charge was immaterial.
• (e) A was charged with murdering Haidar Baksh on the 20th January, 1882, and Khoda Baksh (who tried to arrest him for that murder) on the 21st January, 1882. When charged for the murder of Haidar Baksh, he was tried for the murder of Khoda Baksh. The witnesses present in his defence were witnesses in the case of Haidar Baksh. The Court may infer from this that A was misled, and that the error was material

 

The correct answer is option 2.Key Points

• Section 220 of Criminal Procedure Code 1973 deals with trial for more than one offence.
• (1) If, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence.
• (2) When a person charged with one or more offences of criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation of property as provided in sub-section (2) of section 212 or in sub-section (1) of section 219, is accused of committing, for the purpose of facilitating or concealing the commission of that offence or those offences, one or more offences of falsification of accounts, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence.
• (3) If the acts alleged constitute an offence falling within two or more separate definitions of any law in force for the time being by which offences are defined or punished, the person accused of them may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, each of such offences.
• (4) If several acts, of which one or more than one would by itself or themselves constitute an offence, constitute when combined a different offence, the person accused of them may be charged with, and tried at one trial for the offence constituted by such acts when combined, and for any offence constituted by any one, or more, of such acts.
• (5) Nothing contained in this section shall affect section 71 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

The correct answer is option 2.Key Points

• Section 222 of Criminal Procedure code 1973 deals with when offence proved included in offence charged.
• it says when a person is charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of some only of which constitutes a complete minor offence, and such combination is proved, but the remaining particulars are not proved, he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it.
• When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, although he is not charged with it.
• When a person is charged with an offence, he may be convicted of an attempt to commit such offence although the attempt is not separately charged.
•  Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a conviction of any minor offence where the conditions requisite for the initiation of proceedings in respect of that minor offence have not been satisfied.

See Section 221(2) of Cr.P.C.

Section 221 - Where it is doubtful what offence has been committed.

The correct answer is option 3

Key Points Section 211 of Cr.P.C. says that

•  Every charge under this Code shall state the offence with which theaccused is charged.
• If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific name, the offence may be described in the charge by that name only.
• If the law which creates the offence does not give it any specific name, so much of the definition of the offence must be stated as to give the accused notice of the matter with which he is charged.
•  The law and section of the law against which the offence is said to have been committed shall be mentioned in the charge. 
• The fact that the charge is made is equivalent to a statement that every legal condition required by law to constitute the offence charged was fulfilled in the  particular case.
•  The charge shall be written in the language of the Court.
•  If the accused, having been previously convicted of any offence, is liable, by reason of such previous conviction, to enhanced punishment, or to punishment of a different kind, for a subsequent offence, and it is intended to prove such previous conviction for the purpose of affecting the punishment which the Court may think fit to award for the subsequent offence, the fact, date and place of the previous conviction shall be stated in the charge; and if such statement has been omitted, the Court may add it at any time before sentence is passed.

Section 215 of Cr.P.C. provides the same. No error in stating either the offence or the particulars required to be stated in the charge, and no omission to state the offence or those particulars, shall be regarded at any stage of the case as material, unless the accused was in fact misled by such error or omission, and it has occasioned a failure of justice.

The correct answer is Section 218 (1) Cr. P.C.

Key Points

• Section 218(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) states that for every distinct offense, there shall be a separate charge and every charge shall be tried separately. The purpose of this rule is to ensure a fair trial and to avoid confusing the accused.

Explanation: According to Section 218 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, generally, each offence an accused person is charged with should have its own separate charge and each of these charges should be tried individually. This means that each offence is considered separately and is tried as such. Hence correct option is B

Section 219 CrPC talks about charge of same kind of offences. It says person can be charged with and tried at one trial for any number of such offences not exceeding three in the span of 12 months. 

Section 216(3) CrPC explains that if such alteration or addition does not prejudice the accused in his defence or the prosecution in its conduct of the case, then court can continue with the trial as if the altered or added charge had been the original charge.