Act done in good faith for benefit of child or person with unsound mind, by or by consent of guardian
AI Assist
Summary
When a guardian or lawful custodian consents, an act done in good faith to benefit a child under twelve or a person with mental illness is not treated as an offence even if it causes harm. The protection requires good faith and guardian consent. It does not cover intentional killing or its attempt, acts likely to cause death except to prevent death or cure grievous disease, voluntary grievous hurt (unless to prevent or cure), or abetment of such excluded offences.
Example
Ravi, the father and guardian of eight-year-old Diya, consents to a risky operation that may cause death but aims to cure a serious disease. Because Ravi acted in good faith to benefit Diya, the surgeon’s act and Ravi’s consent are not an offence under this section, unless the act was intended to cause death or falls within the listed exceptions.
Bare Act
Enacted textNothing which is done in good faith for the benefit of a person under twelve years of age, or of person with mental illness, by or by consent, either express or implied, of the guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause or be known by the doer to be likely to cause to that person;
Provided that this exception shall not extend to,
-
(a) the intentional causing of death, or to the attempting to cause death;
-
(b) the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely to cause death, for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity;
-
(c) the voluntary causing of grievous hurt, or to the attempting to cause grievous hurt, unless it be for the purpose of preventing death or grievous hurt, or the curing of any grievous disease or infirmity;
-
(d) the abetment of any offence, to the committing of which offence it would not extend.
Illustration
A, in good faith, for his child’s benefit without his child’s consent, has his child cut for the stone by a surgeon knowing it to be likely that the operation will cause the child’s death, but not intending to cause the child’s death. A is within the exception, in as much as his object was the cure of the child.
Previous year papers
Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.