the petitioners 1 and 2 respectively may be maintained and that the sentence passed on them may be treated as having been passed under the said sections. Apart from anything else, this course, in my opinion, is likely to result in prejudice to the petitioners. They had been put on their trial in respect of offences under Ss. 384 and 384/114 along with a charge under S. 120-B. It is just possible and indeed it is not unlikely that a good deal of evidence that was adduced on behalf of the prosecution in this case in order to establish the charge of conspiracy would not be relevant as against the petitioners on the substantive charges under Ss. 384 and 384/114, I.P.C. The trial held on charges which do not require sanction along with such as are not cognizable without sanction under S. 196-A, Criminal P. C., cannot be separated in this way. I am accordingly of opinion that this rule should be made absolute and the convictions and sentences passed on the petitioners should be set aside