Short Note : 1. It was an appeal from Jail against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barwani, whereby the appellant Bburibai was held guilty for the offence under section 366 IPC for which she was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of three years. Held: After carefully going through the record this Court is of the view that the conviction and sentence against the appellant for the offence under section 366 cannot be sustained. There is no conclusive evidence as regards the age of the prosecutrix from the ossification test the Radiologist has given the age of the prosecutrix to be above 17 years and below 18 years. In Modi's Medical Jurisprudence it is clearly stated that too much reliance should not be placed on the table given in the book showing the age in years of age of the appearance and fusion of some of the epiplysis as observed by different authors with respect to persons of different provinces in India. The author has further stated that recent work has shown that the range of error may be up to 3 years on either side. In view of this statement of the author in the book on Medical Jurisprudence it is difficult to say with exactitude that the prosecutrix was above 17 years but below 18 years of age at the time of the said occurrence. It is quite probable that the prosecutrix was above 18 years of age. Appeal allowed.