“Nothing is an offence which is done by a child below seven years of age.” Discuss. Will it make any difference if the age of the child is twelve years?

Question: “Nothing is an offence which is done by a child below seven years of age.” Discuss. Will it make any difference if the age of the child is twelve years?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [“Nothing is an offence which is done by a child below seven years of age.” Discuss. Will it make any difference if the age of the child is twelve years?

Answer

Section 82 of IPC states that:

Nothing is an offence that is done by a child under seven years of age.

Section 83 IPC states that:

Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion.

An infant below seven years is incapable of doing a criminal act because he is absolutely incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong, The IPC confers absolute immunity and after the age of seven up to twelve years there is qualified immunity.

The immunity of children from criminal liability under section 82 extends to all offences whether under the penal code or under any other local or special law, by virtue of section 40, An infant under seven years is doli incapax; in other words, he is absolutely incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong.

For example: If a boy of 5 years picks up a sharp object such as a knife thinking of it to be a toy and injures someone in that process, he will not be held liable.

If therefore, a child is accused of an offence the proof of the fact that he was at the time below seven years of age is ipso facto an answer to the prosecution. But, there is no answer in the penal code, when a child, who is exactly seven years and committed any offence but as a general rule it is observed that such an infant should be dealt with under Section 82 rather than under Section 83.

It means the benefit of the doubt must always be resolved in favour of the accused. While under section 83 of the code a child above seven years of age and under twelve enjoys qualified immunity and cannot be convicted unless it is expressly found that the child has attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of acts done.

This section contemplates that the child should not know the natural and physical consequences of his conduct.

In the case of Krishna Bhagwan vs. State of Bihar, [AIR 1989 Pat 217] Patna High Court upheld that if a child who is accused of an offence during the trial, has attained the age of 7 years or at the time of the decision the child has attained the age of 7 years can be convicted if he is able to understand the nature of the offence.

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. IPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
2. IPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
3. IPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
4. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
5. IPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
6. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
7. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
8. IPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
9. IPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
10. IPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions