Actus Reus and Mens Rea explained simply with examples!

Aryan hates his neighbor, Vikram, and has been planning to ruin Vikram's expensive sports car for weeks (mens rea). One rainy afternoon, Aryan is driving his own car home from work well within the speed limit. Suddenly, a stray dog darts across the road. Aryan swerves sharply to avoid hitting the dog. As a result, his car skids out of control on the wet asphalt, crashes into Vikram's stationary sports car parked on the driveway, and severely damages it (actus reus). Aryan steps out of his vehicle, looks at the damaged sports car, and says, "I'm glad this happened. I always wanted to destroy your car anyway!" The police register a case against Aryan for intentional damage to property. ─── Question Based on the passage and facts provided, can Aryan be held criminally liable for intentional damage to Vikram's car? • (A) Yes, because Aryan had the clear intent (mens rea) to destroy Vikram’s car for weeks, and the car was ultimately destroyed (actus reus). • (B) Yes, because Aryan’s statement after the crash proves that his guilty mind was present at the scene of the incident. • (C) No, because there was no concurrence between the mens rea and the actus reus; the destruction was a result of an accident, not driven by his bad intent. • (D) No, because property damage caused by car accidents is strictly a civil wrong and can never be tried under criminal law.