The victim was sent to the medical board to estimate her age where it was stated on exhibit number (2) of the prosecution issued on 19/8/2010 (Huda Hamdan Hassan Hamdan, after examination and Dental X-Rays she is born on 1 January 1996.) The appeal court established that the incident (sexual acts) was 5 months pre-date to the capture of the couple on 16/8/2010 as was stated by the convict and established that the act occurred while the victim was 14 years old, while the report of the Court of First Instance stated that the sexual act occurred while the victim was only 14 years, 7 months and 19 days old and referencing the statement of the head of the Medical Board as a defence witness. It is defined from his statements on page (11) that the method applied is the estimation of age, which does not substitute the real age; and he goes on to say that there might be an age difference of at least one year between the real age and the estimated age; that is, the method applied for age estimation is not accurate. On the other hand, it is stated on the investigation report that she is (15) years old, a statement that was supported by her mother at the time when filing the case, therefore a doubt is in effect as to: “When did the accused have a sexual intercourse with the victim?” It is a wellknown fact that the age of puberty has been defined by article (3), but not defined by the Child Act, and the definition of adulthood is defined under article (3) as: “adulthood means that a person is established to have reached adulthood by the conclusive natural signs and has reached 15 years of age…”). Here, the medical report failed to observe and examine the conclusive natural signs of adulthood on the victim or the mergence of these signs on the girl who only underwent the X-Ray examination, although she and her mother both stated that she is 15 years of age, which raises a serious doubt on whether or not she had reached the age of puberty, according to the legal standards, not to mention that the legal standards is the one deemed to apply, for the Islamic Sharia’ doctrine and law is the basis of all laws and her doctrines in case of dispute with any man-made laws should prevail above all as stated in the act of the interpretations of laws. As there is a doubt as to whether the victim has reached the age of puberty, it should be interpreted in the accused’s favour and regard the mentioned victim as of age, adult and with her consent. Second: The mentioned girl ran away from her applicant mother after losing the guardianship of her father who divorced the mother, left the country and remarried. So the mother in turn remarried, but the girl did not find the proper supervision and care from her step-father, and, therefore, ran away from home at a teen age, only to meet a friend who provided her with a home with a liquor seller which subjected her to face continual harassments from drunks, and which resulted in meeting the convict in whose care she found the protection she so desired; and they fell in love and she consented to go to bed with him and have sexual intercourse a number of times; and it could be deduced from that that she has reached the age of puberty, and therefore she has committed the crime of adultery. Third: The indictment should have been in accordance with article (146) of the Criminal Code. The accused did not protect her because she was thought to be a victimized child according to the claim filed by her mother against the accused, while she – the mother – failed in her duty to take care of and safeguard her daughter in the absence of her father, and in turn remarried herself, and became, as the poet Ahmed Showqi said: The orphan is not he whose parents are deceased - The toils of life, left him in misery, But he then found a substitute for them - The world and time their wisdom teaching him. The orphan is the one whose parents are Alive and yet repulse and neglect him.