'A' with the intention of murdering 'Z' instigates 'B', a child below seven years of age, to do an act which causes 'Z's death. 'B', in consequence of the instigation, did the act in the absence of 'A' thereby causing 'Z's death. What offence has been committed by 'A'?

Correct option is D

'A' has committed the offence of murder under Section 302 of the IPC. Even though 'A' was not physically present when the crime was committed, he is responsible for the murder because he instigated 'B', a child below the age of seven who is considered "doli incapax" (incapable of forming criminal intent). Since 'B' cannot be held criminally liable, 'A', who had the necessary mens rea (intention to kill) and instigated the act, is fully responsible for the murder.
Information Booster: Under Section 108 of the IPC, a person who instigates another, especially a child or someone who cannot be held criminally responsible, to commit an offence is liable for that offence as if they had committed it themselves. Section 304 IPC, which deals with abetment leading to murder, would also apply here, but since the child is below seven years and incapable of forming criminal intent, 'A' is directly liable for murder.
Additional Knowledge:
· No offence (a): This is incorrect because the law considers the instigator responsible, even if not physically present.
· Simple offence of causing hurt (b): This is incorrect because the intention and result were far more severe than just causing hurt.
· Attempt to murder (c): This is incorrect because the murder was completed, not just attempted.