“Age is just a number. It’s totally irrelevant unless, of course, you happen to be a bottle of wine,” said Joan Collins, but in judiciary, age is definitely not “just a number,” especially when there is a question of accused being a juvenile.
The court on Sunday ordered ossification test for one of the accused in the murder case of Nationalist Congress Party leader Baba Siddique.This came after the court witnessed disagreements over the age of Dharamraj Kashayap.
Kashayap said that he was 17 years old while the prosecutors told the court that his Aadhaar showed that he was 19.
What is ossification test
The ossification test is a medical procedure that evaluates bone maturity to estimate a person’s age. It involves analyzing X-ray images of bones, especially in the hands and wrists, to track the development and fusion of growth plates.
In children and adolescents, ossification reflects the progression of bone development, with certain bones hardening at specific ages. This test is commonly used in forensic science and legal contexts to accurately determine an individual’s age when needed.
What has SC said on age-determination test
The Supreme Court, has in several cases sought age-determination test, however it has also said that it is not infallible.
In 2022, the apex court had rejected a plea of an accused who claimed to be juvenile, saying, “Needless to say, the plea of juvenility has to be raised in a bona fide and truthful manner. If the reliance is on a document to seek juvenility which is not reliable or dubious in nature, the appellant cannot be treated to be juvenile keeping in view that the Act is a beneficial legislation.”
Meanwhile, in 2016, the court had said that an accused cannot be declared juvenile solely on the basis of ossification test result in order to allow him to escape jail term.
“Courts have always held that the evidence afforded by radiological examination is no doubt a useful guiding factor for determining the age of a person but the evidence is not of a 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 useful guiding factor is not conclusive and has to be considered along with other circumstances,” it had noted.