Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

State vs . Sushil Kumar on 5 August, 2013 1 IN THE COURT OF MS. ILLA

years, but less than 16 years. It was observed that margin of error in the radiologist' s examination was of two years on either ... notorious and one can take judicial notice that the margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is two years on either side

exact and may vary by two years on either side. Margin of error in such a radiological examination is two years on either side ... held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is to be taken as two years

exact and may vary by two years on either side. Margin of error in such a radiological examination is two years on either side ... held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is to be taken as two years

years. It is settled law that there is a margin of error in the ossification test report. But even after considering the margin of error

prosecutrix was between 14.5 years to 16.5 years. The margin of error in age ascertained by the radiological examination is two years on either side

years of age. The law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years on either side

opinion, prosecutrix is 17 years. The law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years

years. The law law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years on either side

test, her age was assessed between 16 - 18 years and if margin of error is given as reflected in the impugned judgment, her approximate