The court affirmed the necessity of proving the contents of documents for age determination in POCSO cases, emphasizing fair trial principles.

ORDER :

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)

1. Present application is filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:

“(b) Allow this Application by quashing and setting aside the Impugned order dated 16.12.2024 (Annexure-A) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge, Pocso, Dahod at Limkheda below Exhibit-64 in Special POCSO Case No. 24 of 2023, and further be pleased to allow application at exhibit-64 and original birth certificate may be ordered to be exhibited and admitted as evidence in the interest of justice;”

2. It is the case of the applicant that he is facing charges under the POCSO Act. To establish the age of the victim, the prosecution previously examined the then Talati-cum-Mantri, who referred to Exhibit 59—the date and extract of the birth register. However, he submitted that the record was not available and stated that he was awaiting a report from the Taluka Development Officer before requesting the exhibition of the said documents.

3. The learned APP objected, arguing that in the absence of proof of the contents of the said documents, they could not be exhibited, and the entry was not proven. Subsequently, the defense examined the Talati-cum-Mantri who was serving in Sajoi Gram Panchayat at the relevant time. He produced the document marked as 51/1 and submitted that it contained the entry regarding the victim’s birth. He further submitted that the birth certificate produced below Exhibit 63, marked as 63/1, is a certified copy of the victim's date of birth. However, since the entry was made by a Peon and there was no explanation as to how the defense obtained the document, it was not examined due to the absence of the original record.

4. The learned advocate has now submitted that the original record is available and that he is able to prove the contents of the document. Since age is a relevant factor in determining the victim’s age in a POCSO case, the applicant now seeks permission to prove the documents produced at Mark 63/1 by examining the defense witness for this limited purpose.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant’s request to exhibit the document pursuant to Exhibit 64 is not permissible as per law. However, if the original record is now available and the applicant is able to prove the contents of the document marked as 63/1, then keeping in mind that the principle of fair trial and if application allowed, then also not come prejudice in any manner to the investigation as all procedure is subject to an opportunity of cross examined the witness. Hence, in the interest of justice, it is expedient to allow the present application and grant the defense an opportunity to prove the contents of Mark 63/1 in accordance with the law.

6. If the applicant is able to prove the contents of the said document as per the provisions, then in accordance with law, learned Sessions Judge out to have exhibited the said document and independently appreciate its evidenciary value. It is needless to say that if any evidence is tendered in this regard, it does not bar to cross-examine the witness by the prosecution. Learned Sessions Judge shall have to keep in mind the provisions of Section 94 of the Juvenile Act and POCSO Act and independently appreciate the evidenciary value.

7. With the aforesaid direction, the present application stands disposed of accordingly.