Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 366, 376 -- Kidnapping and rape - Age of victim - Evidence of father of victim was corroborated by a contemporaneous entry in her school records maintained in ordinary course of business which is more authentic and convincing piece of evidence with regard to her age - Failure to hold ossification test to determine age of victim does..........
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Section 94(2) -- Determination of age by Ossification Test - S.94(2) of the Act is couched in a preferential term i.e. only in the absence of certificate mentioned in S.94(2)(i) of the Act, any other certificate mentioned in S.94(2)(ii) of the Act shall be acceptable and only in the absence of any certificate..........
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 365, 366A, 370A, 376D, 34, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 6, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Section 3 -- Bail - Offence u/ss 363, 365, 366-A, 370-A, 376-D, 34 IPC, S.6 POCSO Act and S.3 SC/ST Act - Prosecutrix and..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 366, 368, 376, 506, 34 -- Kidnapping and rape - Age determination - Radiological examination - Margin of error is two years on either side - Benefit of age determination by ossification test goes to accused...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 366, 368, 376, 506, 34 -- Kidnapping and rape - Determination of age of prosecutrix - Bone age of prosecutrix was between 14.5 to 16.5 years - Margin of error in age ascertained by radiological examination is two years on either side - Since Court can add 2 years to age of prosecutrix, it would not be proper to assume and presume that..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 366 -- Kidnapping - Age of prosecutrix - Investigating agency was not sure about authenticity of school register, therefore ossification test of prosecutrix was carried to determine her age - Age of prosecutrix as per medical examination determined between 16 to 18 years - Margin of 2 years is to be extended to report of ossification..........
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Section 94(2) - - Juvenility - Once birth certificate is found to be genuine upon enquiry, ordinarily one cannot go beyond it by entertaining a roving an fishing enquiry to dig out any irregularity - Holding petitioner not to be juvenile in conflict with law on the basis of a purported ossification test and also..........
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Section 95 -- Determination of age - Ossification test is not conclusive of age determination...........
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Section 95 -- Determination of age of victim - Rape case - Bone ossification test - No document of age available on record - Bone ossification test report estimated age as 17 to 19 years - Applying the margin of error of two years on either side, age could be between 15 to 21 years - Even if margin of error..........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 363, 366, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 17, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 -- Offence u/ss 363, 366 IPC and S.17 of POCSO Act - Quashing of FIR - Prosecutrix found major by Doctors who conducted her ossification test as per order of Court - Medical report of prosecutrix is based on complete..........
