the Ex.P10 Birth Certificate with regard to the name of the father mentioned therein, the records reveal that the father's name mentioned in the Birth Certificate is Veeramani. But, as per Ex.P1 complaint and Ex.P7 F.I.R, the father's name of P.W.1 victim is Rajakannu. But, as per the admission of P.W.1 in her cross-examination, it is seen that the said Veeramani is her Biological father. From the cross-examination of P.W.2, it is clear that the said Veeramani is the first husband of her mother. Moreover, the said Rajakannu has been examined as P.W.3. He has also admitted in his cross-examination that the Biological father of P.W.1 is Veeramani and he (P.W.3) is the step father of her. So, as per the above evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, the said Veeramani whose name is entered in the Birth Certificate is the Biological father of P.W.1. So, at the time of registering her birth, the name of the Biological father was entered. But, after about 15 years from the registration of birth, the alleged occurrence occurred. Hence, in the meantime, as per the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3, it is learnt that the said Rajakannu was married to mother of P.W.1 and so he(P.W.3) is the step father. So, at the time of occurrence and complaint, P.W.3 showed as her father's name as Rajakannu. Considering this aspect though the father's name differs in the Birth Certificate is not at all fatal to the prosecution case.
