Correct option is D
In the given scenario, 'A' is not guilty of any offense under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The reason is that under criminal law, there is generally no legal duty to act unless there is a specific relationship (such as a parent-child relationship) or a statutory duty that compels one to take action. Even though 'A' is a national champion swimmer and morally could have saved the child, his failure to act does not constitute a criminal offense unless a specific legal duty to rescue the child can be established.
Information Booster Under Indian law, criminal liability typically arises from a person's actions (acts) or their omissions (failures to act) when there is a legal duty to act. While moral and ethical duties may exist, they do not translate into criminal liability unless backed by law. The law generally does not impose a duty to rescue or intervene, except in certain relationships (like a parent-child) or where a statutory duty is imposed.
Additional Knowledge Let’s examine why the other options do not apply:
· (a) Abetment of suicide: Abetment involves instigating, aiding, or facilitating another person to commit suicide. In this case, 'A' did not instigate or encourage the child to drown, so this charge does not apply.
· (b) Murder: Murder involves an intentional act to cause death. 'A' did not actively do anything to cause the child's death, so murder is not applicable here.
· (c) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder: This charge applies when a person causes death with the intention of causing such bodily harm as is likely to cause death. Since 'A' did not act to harm the child, and mere failure to act without a legal duty does not amount to culpable homicide, this option does not apply.
