Delhi High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“In the present case, despite the clear statement given by the survivor that the relationship between the appellant and herself was consensual in nature, he has been convicted under the POCSO Act only for the reason that on the date of incident she was less than 18 years of age.”

gujarat high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court also directed the Medical Panel to conduct an ossification test of the minor.

Bombay High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Eruption of wisdom tooth may at the most suggest that the age of the person is 17 years or above, but non-eruption or absence of wisdom tooth does not conclusively prove that the person is below 18 years of age.

allahabad high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court said that the admission form has not been filled in by the parents of the victim, but by a stranger, whose credentials are unknown. Thus, the significance of victim’s medical age determination will be considered, as per which, she was a major on the date of the incident.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gauhati High Court: The Division Bench of Sudhanshu Dhulia, CJ., and  Manash Ranjan Pathak, J., addressed a suo motu PIL concerning the

Case BriefsSupreme Court

“The ossification test can be said to be relevant for determining the approximate age of a person in conflict with law. However, when the person is around 40-55 years of age, the structure of bones cannot be helpful in determining the age.”