English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Suppose some accused child is 10 years old. That child is of normal intelligence , good in studies, intelligently performs his day to day activities ;does it mean.....
that child can't be of immature understanding & can't take benefit of section 83 of Indian Penal Code???
Must some accused be of low I.Q. or of unsound mind or mentally retarded or Idiot or lunatic or mentally abnormal to take benefit of section 83 of IPC to prove immaturity of understanding???
So how maturity & level of understanding of that accused child of 10 yrs old, is decided to give him benefit of sec. 83 of IPC in India?

2007-06-27 14:28:48 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

1 answers

Section 83 of the Indian Penal Code provides Act of a child above seven and fewer than twelve of immature
understanding.--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 of the nature and consequences of
His conduct on that occasion.
It has been held by the Supreme Court that where the accused is below 12 years of age the issue as to his having attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge of the nature & consequences of his act is essential to determine the question of his guilt. In the given case the child of 10 years with normal intelligence, good in studies, intelligently performs his day to day activities doesn't counts what really counts if he understand the act he committed, its consequences & punishment that otherwise would have made him guilty if he was not of the tender age below 12 years. If his conduct during committing such act shows that he was aware of the consequences of the act & knowing this he still commits the act he still be guilty of the offence, for example a child picked up his knife & advanced towards the deceased with a threatening gesture, saying that he would cut him to bits & did actually cut him, his entire action in only consistent with the inference that he was fully capable of understanding the nature & consequences of his act. Thus we can say its the facts & circumstances of the particular case with regards to the child's understanding the nature & consequence of his act which is important to see if he can be given benefits of section 83 or not .

2007-06-27 17:29:02 · answer #1 · answered by vijay m Indian Lawyer 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers