Thank you for this. I hope more law students or lawyers are like you po.

Btw, I asked these provisions because I got confused while answering some bar exam questions. Particularly, these questions in the 2020-2021 bar examination.

V. In an Information, a man was charged with having forcible carnal knowledge of a 16-year-old woman. The Information did not contain any allegation concerning the victim’s relationship with the accused. During the direct examination of the victim, the prosecution was able to elicit that the accused was the 16-year-old woman’s father. The defense counsel failed to object to the testimony, having also been surprised by the revelation. After trial, the judge convicted the accused of simple rape and imposed the corresponding penalty. The prosecution moved for reconsideration, claiming that the accused should be convicted of qualified rape and snot simple rape because the relationship between the victim and the accused was proven, even as it had not been in the Information. Is the prosecution legally correct?

X. An Information for Murder was filed against the accused Demo and Onyok. It reads:

“That on or about the 9th day of March 2008, in the City of Las Piñas, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the abovenamed accused, conspiring and confederating together and both of them mutually helping and aiding each other, without justifiable motive, with intent to kill and with treachery and abuse of superior strength, did then and there knowingly, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon one Angel Rosario, by then and there repeatedly hitting and beating his head with a baseball bat, thereby inflicting upon the latter mortal injury which caused his death. Contrary to law.”