1 2025:CGHC:11384 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 872 of 2025 Balram Verma S/o Bharat Verma Aged About 22 Years Village Keshla, P.S. Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh (Address Is Wrongly Mentioned In The Impugned Order) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. - Mohgaanv, District - Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh 2-Xyz(Details In Closed Envelope) 3 - Raju Verma S/o Kamal Aged About 34 Years R/o Jujhara, P.S. Mohgaanv, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh 4 - Nirasa Bai W/o Raju Verma Aged About 40 Years R/o Jujhara, P.S. Mohgaanv, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Aditi Joshi, Advocate For State : Ms.Priya Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07.03.2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS,2023 by the petitioner challenging the order dated 10.02.2025 passed by learned Special Additional Session Judge, Khairagarh, District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions Case (POCSO) No. 30/2022 rejecting the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for 2 recalling the victim PW-02, her mother PW-01 and father PW-03 for cross- examination which got rejected. 2. The case in nutshell is such that the father of the prosecutrix/respondent no. 2 has lodged missing report that her minor daughter was missing and some unknown person has allured her and abducted her, on investigation Police has recovered the victim. The petitioner was arrested by Police on 04.10.2022 and was granted bail on 07.12.2022 on the ground that the prosecutrix has herself admitted in the statement of Section164 of Cr.P.C. that she got married with the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned trial court has failed to appreciate the right to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses effectively which is the fundamental right of the accused. Learned Trial Court has erroneously rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is filing lacunas in the case. Learned trial court has failed to consider that the age of the prosecutrix plays a vital role in prosecution under POCSO Act, 2012. Thus she prays to set aside the order date 10.02.2025 passed by the Special Additional Session Judge, Khairagarh, District Khariagarh Chhuikhadam Gandai Chhattisgarh arising out of Crime No. 22/2022 registered at Police Station Mohgaanv in Special Criminal Case (POCSO) No. 30 of 2022 and to allow this application preferred by the petitioner for recalling of victim, Mother and father of the victim to secure the ends of justice. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the application for recalling of the victim, mother and father of the victim and stated that they have already been examined and there is no other question left that has to be asked to them. Moreover calling of victim again and again for examination is against the law. 5. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 3 6. On bare perusal of the documents produced before this court as Annexure P/1, Annexure P/2 and Annexure P/3 , it is crystal clear that the examination of the prosecutrix, her mother as well as her father has been completely done and there seems to be no other examination need to be done. So far as the question of age of the prosecutrix is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that question related to age of the prosecutrix has to be asked from the prosecutrix, her mother and her father. But in the considered opinion of this Court the vital thing which is to be considered while assessing the age of the victim is the examination of the teacher of the school of the prosecutrix as well as the Dakhil Kharij Register, which has already been examined. So calling the prosecutrix, her mother and her father just to ask the age related question is not att all needed. Hence this court is of the considered opinion that learned Special Additional Session Judge, Khairagarh, district Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai Chhattisgarh in Special Sessions Case POCSO No. 30/2022 has not committed any grave error, perversity or illegality in rejecting the application for recalling the victim, her mother and father for re-examination. Therefore, the present petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza