determination of age of an accused who appeared or claimed to be a juvenile was, therefore, initially the statutory responsibility of the police---In the absence of any inquiry by the police the determination of age and juvenility of the accused could be determined by the court having taken cognizance of the matter.     2020 PLD  356  SUPREME-COURT

Opinion not based on ossifications test by doctor, held opinion rightly rejected. (DB) PLD 1977 Kar. 75 Mohammad Saleem .
Opinion not supported by reliable evidence carries no value. PLD 1951 BJ 7 Ghulam Qadir v. Noor Ahmad.
"The doctor's certificate which is only an assertion of opinion and the minor's declaration before the Magistrate as to age is no proof of age. (PC) AIR 1916 PC 242 followed in PLD 1952 BJ 15 Dittoo v. Crown. AIR 1928 Lah. 250 AIR 1939 All. 708.
Medical certificate about age given preference over certificate issued by Cantonment Board. Medical Certificate gives a margin of one year either way. PLD 1988 Kar. 142, Jamshed v. Agha Suhail, etc.
Age of accused. Best evidence is that of radiologist. Preference cannot be given to school leaving certificate on ground of that being more beneficial to the accused. (DB) PLD 1966 Pesh. 97 Hassan v. Bashir Ahmad.
Proof. Evidence of radiologist is to be preferred to School Certificate. (DB) PLD 1972 Pesh. 27 Iftikhar. 
Ossification test. Age of victim girl determined by ossification test, held test not very much advanced in fixation of girl's age with accuracy. (DB) 1968 P.Cr.L.J. 529 Rajat Kundan.
"Though a better guide to the age of a person yet it is not an accurate estimate. Margin of one year on either side possible. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 936 Yousaf.
X-ray test for age is more accurate than other clinical means. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 1227 Abdul Rahim.
On clinical and radiological examination the doctor opined the age of prosecutrix between 15 and 16 years. Held estimate of age on such considerations not always correct. PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Kar.) 511 Banney Khan.
X-ray ossification test. X-ray report and ossification test do not establish age with certainty or exactitude. Various factors control ossification. Estimate of age on radiological examination fixing gril's age between 15 and 16 years. Held, estimate of age on such considerations not always correct. Possibility of girl having crossed 16 years not excluded. Kidnapping not established. 1975 P.Cr.L.J. 453 (Kar.) Banney Khan.
Medical evidence as to age is from its nature based on conjectures and cannot be relied on to determine with precision the exact age of a person. AIR 1928 Lah. 250 = 113 IC 53 Zaid v. Roshanai.
School Leaving Certificate showing petitioner's age at the time of occurrence less than 16 years preferred to X-ray report showing the age between 16 and 17 years. PLJ 1974 Cr. (BJ) 442 Muhammad Saleem.
School Leaving Certificate showing accused to be less than 16 at the time of the incident of murder while police showing accused to be 19 years. Held the School Certificate was a good piece of evidence of tender age. Bail allowed by Supreme Court. PLJ 1983 SC 383 Muhammad Anwar NLR 1983 Cr. 317.
Birth Certificate Preferred over School Leaving Certificate about question of age in bail matter. PLJ 1997 Cr. C (Lah) 150, Shamsher.
Municipal Record. Medical evidence as to age cannot stand against municipal register of births properly kept. AIR 1946 Sindh 132 Zaitoon v. Emp. PLD 1966 Kar. 71 Banney Khan.
Certificate from Municipal Register about age at variance with medical certificate about age. Doctor's Certificate not relied upon. PLJ 1976 BJ 1 Muhammad Anwar etc. 1-975 P.Cr.LJ 732 Bachinoo v. Abdul Hakim AIR 1946 Sindh 132 Zaitoon v. Emp. PLD 1966 Kar. 71 Banney Khan.
Benefit of doubt about age of accused, given to accused. (DB) PLD 1951 Lah. 126 Sarja v. Crown.
Two conflicting certificates of age. Benefit given to the accused for bail 1975 P.Cr.LJ 402 Muhammad Akram.
Age of girl not proved with accuracy below 16. Conviction for kidnaping cannot be sustained. (DB) PLD 1950 Dacca 23 Santosh Kumar v. Crown.
Medical testimony regarding age of girl not supported by reasons, conviction cannot be maintained on such testimony. PLD 1963 Kar. 684 Allah Bux, PLD 1961 Kar. 679 Rafiq Ahmad 32 PLR 98 = 32 Cr.L.J. 1931.
Age of the accused as recorded by the committing magistrate and Sessions Judge by appearance relied upon (SC) PLD 1965 SC 363 Ghulam Rasul v. Ali Akbar.
Age recorded by magistrate. Age of the accused recorded by magistrate as 21 not accepted in view of perfunctory manner in which particulars of accused and witnesses are recorded during inquiry. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 568 Muhammad Afzal.
Age of girl. Onus lies on prosecution to prove her minority beyond "Shadow of doubt" bare statement of girl about her own age without any corroboration is not sufficient. PLD 1963 Lah.239 Mawa Din AIR 1932 Cal. 41 rel.
Age of abductee in question. Trial Court to necessarily summon and record more evidence about place and date of birth of prosecutrix as also entries in connection therewith; PLJ 1984 SC 192. Muhammad Azam v. Muhammad Iqbal.
Relevant date regarding question of age is the date of offence. (SC) PLD 1959 SC (Pak.) 480 (483) Sher Hassan.
Age and Bail A person released on bail by the Sessions Judge on the ground of his age being below 16 years. Order granting bail is not to be recalled after crossing 16 years of age limit by the accused. 1968 P.Cr.LJ 340 Muhammad Iqbal v. Abdul Basit etc.
Age and sentence. Old man of 60 or being a man with family is no ground for lesser penalty. (DB) PLD 1951 Lah. 322 Khairdi Khan v. Crown.
Boys under 18 years. It is not an inflexible rule of practice that sentence of death cannot be passed on a boy under 18 years. (DB) PLD 1954 Lah. 73 Khalas Khan v. Crown.
A youth of 16 years committing rape and murder when not under the influence of any other person, sentenced to death. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 739 Nazar.
Accused immature of 16 years at occurrence, no premeditation, sudden occurrence because of petty dispute, sentence reduced to already undergone under section 304 (I), PPC. (DB) 1972 P.Cr.LJ 546 Sarwar. 
Youth of 18 years. No mitigating circumstances. Death sentence proper. (SC) 1973 SCMR 219 Muhammad Mushtaq.
Youth should be taken into consideration with other factors while awarding sentence. (DB) PLD 1956 Sindh 73 Sher Ali v. Crown. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 685 (BJ) Bahadar. 
Boys of 16 sentenced to death (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 739 Nazar. PLD 1972 Pesh . 27 Iftikhar.
Extreme Youth i.e. early or middle teens itself is invariably a sufficient ground for lesser punishment i.e., transportation instead of death. (DB) PLD 1962 Dacca 46 State. v. Tasir-ud-Din (DB) AIR 1928 Lah. 855, Harnam v. Emperor AIR 1941 Lah. 220 = ILR 22 Lah. 366 Maghar Singh v. Emperor.
Accused less than 18 years on date of occurrence. Blows struck in a sudden quarrel. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1765 Abdul Rashid.
Old man of 60 firing a gun shot at deceased after an altercation and exchange of abuses between them. Incident took place in a few minutes. Death sentence reduced to transportation. (DB) 1969 P.Cr.LJ 913 Abdul Hakim
Tender age, 14 years. Accused student of 14 years of age, acting under influence of co-accused (father) giving one blow in early part of fight. Under Section 304 (II) 5 years sentence reduced to 2« years R.I (DB) PLD 1968 Dacca 767 Shahid Ali.