Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INFANCY
INFANCY
Every Offence is not absolute, they have certain exceptions. When IPC was drafted, it was
assumed that there were no exceptions in criminal cases which were a major loophole. So a
separate Chapter 1V was introduced by the makes of the code applicable to entire concept.
Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 containing Sections 76 to 106 deals with
provisions for General Exceptions. A person committing an Offence under the
circumstances and exceptions mentioned in Chapter 1V is excused from criminal liability
and punishment shall not be imposed upon him in such case.
TWO ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS (FOR AN ACT TO BECOME CRIME)
When these elements are combined, crime is said to have taken place. Only if an action
takes place without the intention or if there is just an intention but no action, then it is not a
crime.
EXPLANATION
A child is considered innocent, and any wrongful act done by a child can not be
said to be a crime as it lacks mens rea (guilty mind).
The law presumes that a child below the age of 7 years is ‘doli incapax’. Latin maxim,
a child has no
discretion to
distinguish right
from wrong, thus
criminal
intention does
not arise.
Section 2(12) – defines child
A person who has not completed 18 years of age.
The fact that at the time of commission, the child was below
7 is ipso facto (by the very fact or act) an answer to the
prosecution, the scope of immunity granted under section 82
of IPC is wide enough to exempt a child not only from
prosecution for an offense under IPC but also from the
offenses under special as well as local law, as explained in
section 40 of IPC.
Case law
(section 83)
MARSH VS LOADER (1863) 14 CBNS 535
• An 11-year-old boy had picked up a knife and advanced towards the victim saying that he
would cut him to bits and did actually cut him.
• The court held the boy’s entire conduct led to the one inference which was, that he knew,
that the cut inflicted by the knife would effectuate(to make something happen) his intention of
hurting the victim.
• Defence, section 83, failed to protect him.
• He was held liable.
MARIMUTH VS UNKNOWN
the accused, a girl of 10 years of age, picked up a silver button worth eight
annas and gave it to her mother.
It was held that the girl was not liable for theft because the circumstances did
not disclose that she had attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge
the nature of her act.
Age immunity
The child need not plead the defense under section 83, they need to prove
maturity only
Section 12 of JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT:-
Juvenile in conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail solely on the
grounds of their juvenility.
Suraj Gupta thru his father v. the state of UP, 2018(183) AIC 880: 2018 ACrC
220: 2018(3) All Lj 31
Sec 18 – orders regarding child found to be guilty
.
supervision of the organization and institution appointed by the board
• The board can order the child or his parents or guardian to pay the fine, provided that if
the child is working the provisions of labor law are not violated.
• The board can allow the child to be released on probation for his good behavior and
• The board can direct the child to be released on probation of his good conduct under the
well-being supervision of a fit facility which will ensure good behavior and well-being of
the child for a period not exceeding 3 years.
• The board can even direct the child to be sent to a special home for not exceeding 3 years
in order to provide reformative services such as education, development of skills,
counseling, behavior modification therapy, and psychiatric support.
•Attend school
•Attend vocational training center
•Attend a therapeutic center.
Section 18(3)