- 04/25/2019 at 1:55 pm #616965EduGorillaKeymasterSelect Question Language :
Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as Principle and the other as Facts. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
1. Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
2. 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.
3. Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft.
Facts: Sakshi is far more intelligent than most of her classmates and had an IQ of a graduate at an age of 9 years. Her friend Kamini, had a book which she refused to lend to Sakshi. Sakshi waited for the recess and during the recess break, she carefully took the book out from Kamini’s bag and hid under her desk.
Is she liable for the offence of theft or not?
Post your Training /Course EnquiryAre You looking institutes / coaching center for
- Sakshi is guilty as she had sufficient maturity and understanding of her actions.
- Sakshi is not guilty because she is protected under the second principle.
- Sakshi is not guilty as she is a minor.
- Sakshi is not guilty as she did not understand the nature and consequences of her act.
- IIT-JEE, NEET, CAT
- Bank PO, SSC, Railways
- Study Abroad