HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.101 OF 2008 DATE:17-06-2010 BETWEEN Manne Narasimha Rao …Petitioner AND Saranu Panakala Rao & Others. …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.101 OF 2008 ORDER: The petitioner filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the order of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Bapatla, dated 9.1.2008 made in Crl.M.P.No.64 of 2007 in S.C.No.166 of 2006 whereby the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the petition filed by the State under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall P.W.2 to mark the date of birth certificate of the victim girl-P.W.1 issued by the Ponnur Municipality to show that the victim girl was a minor by the date of offence. Admittedly, in the complaint filed by the petitioner-de facto complainant for the offences under Sections 366-A and 506 read with Section 34 I.P.C., the age of the victim girl was shown as 23.7.1989 by producing Secondary School Certificate. During the course of trial, the accused did not dispute the said date of birth. However, the complainant filed the impugned application to recall P.W.2 to mark the date of birth certificate of the victim gril-P.W.1 issued by the Ponnur Municipality certifying the date of birth of the victim girl as 23.1.1989. By the impugned order, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge dismissed the application holding that the document which has been obtained by P.W.2 on 22.12.2007 is only after the examination of P.Ws.1 and 2, who stated in their evidence that P.W.1 was born on 23.7.1989, and that recalling of P.W.2 is only for the purpose of filling up the lacunae in the prosecution case. If the complainant has already marked the Secondary School Certificate of victim girl showing the date of birth as 23.7.1989, there is no need to mark the certificate issued by the Ponnur Municipality showing the date of birth of victim girl as 23.1.1989 for the reason that even if the said date of birth recorded in S.S.C. certificate is taken into consideration, which has also not been disputed by the accused, the victim girl is a minor. In view of the same, no purpose will be served in marking the document stated to be issued by the Ponnur Municipality. However, liberty is granted to the prosecution to mark the Secondary School Certificate to prove the age of the victim girl, if not already marked. The Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. JUNE 17, 2010 Tsr.