Mohit @ Kishan v. State

$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 816/2018 & Crl. M.A. Nos. 32474-76/2018 MOHIT @ KISHAN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Roshan Lal Saini and Ms. Kavita Saini, Advocates.

Versus

STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Amit Chadha, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Govind, P.S.

Uttam Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R

% 19.09.2018 Crl. M.A. No. 32476/2018 (for delay) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay in filing the revision petition is condoned.

The application is allowed.

CRL.REV.P. 816/2018 & Crl. M.A. Nos. 32474-76/2018 The petitioner impugns an order dated 11.04.2017, which referred to a Bone Ossification Test concluding the petitioner's age between 22 years to 30 years as of 12.08.2016 i.e. the petitioner can at best be given margin of two years, as permissible under the law. In which case, on the lower side, the petitioner's age would be 20 years. The petitioner seeks benefit of 3 1⁄2 years. Even then, he would be 18 1⁄2 years old.

In the circumstances, there is no error in the impugned order. The petition is without merits and is accordingly dismissed alongwith pending applications.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J.

SEPTEMBER 19, 2018 sb