girl could be from 17 to 19 years. This margin of error in age has been judicially recognized by this Court in the case ... notorious and one can take judicial notice that the margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is two years on either side
notorious and one can take judicial notice that the margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is two years on either side ... notorious and one can take judicial notice that the margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is two years on either side. Undoubtedly
between
1416 years. Accused was held entitled to advantage of marginal error based
on ossification test ... years and below 16 years, meaning thereby that
even after giving marginal error of two years, she was below 18 years of age,
even then
years is possible and when there is a possibility of margin of
error of two years, then the view in favour of the appellant/accused ... held that the said margin of two years should
always be taken on the higher side. Whether the margin of error of two years
conclusive and incontrovertible nature and it
is subject to a margin of error. Medical
evidence as to the age of a person though a
very ... rule, that the said margin of
two years should always be taken on the higher side. Whether
the margin of error of two years
girl was above 14 years and below 16 years with an error
margin of one year, the school leaving certificate and the
school register were
Radiologist was 16 to 17 years. Obviously in such tests the margin of error on either side varies from 11/2 years to 2 years ... case of this nature again this benefit of margin of error has to go to the accused and thus her age could be 18 years
years and a few months. But there can be a marginal error of about three years one way or the other, if medical evidence
above 16 years and
below 18 years and if the margin of error of two years is taken in
favour of the appellant then ... ossification test report filed as Exhibit-P/11 and if the margin of
error of two years is taken in favour of the appellant then
Supreme
9/15
Court has observed that margin of error in age ascertained by
radiological examination is two years on either side.
17. There ... that Ex.P/11 is not believable in this reference that margin
of error of two years is possible on either side.
18. During recording
