Correct option is B
Section 82 IPC provides immunity to children under the age of seven from any criminal liability, as they are considered doli incapax, meaning they are legally incapable of forming the necessary criminal intent due to their age.
Section 83 IPC, however, applies to children aged seven to under twelve years. It states that an act is not an offence if it is done by a child who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of their actions. Conversely, if the child is found to have sufficient maturity, they can be held criminally liable.
Since the child in the question is exactly seven years old, Section 83 is applicable. The key element here is the child’s maturity. If the child has sufficient maturity of understanding, they can be held guilty. Therefore, option (b), which states that the child will "be guilty if he is of sufficient maturity," is the most accurate answer.
Information Booster
Section 83 IPC deals with the criminal liability of children aged between seven and twelve. The law recognizes that children within this age group might not fully comprehend the implications of their actions. However, if a child is found to have sufficient maturity, they can be held responsible for their actions. This section creates a rebuttable presumption that a child in this age group is not criminally liable unless proven otherwise.
Additional Knowledge
·
Section 82 IPC: Grants absolute immunity to children under seven years, recognizing that they are incapable of criminal intent (mens rea).
·
Section 83 IPC: Applies to children aged seven to under twelve, introducing the concept of maturity in assessing criminal liability.
·
Mens Rea in Children: The law presumes that children under seven cannot form criminal intent, and children between seven and twelve can only be held liable if they have the necessary maturity to understand the consequences of their actions.
