This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned III Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in S.C. No. 312/2014 dated 17.06.2016 wherein the accused is convicted for the offence punishable u/S 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further imprisonment for six months. The accused is also convicted for the offence u/S 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant-accused and the learned Govt. Pleader for the respondent-State and perused records of the case.

3. It transpires in the complaint that Smt. Gangamma Mallikarjun Lakkundi has filed a complaint before the Nesargi Police Station alleging that, on 07.09.2014 that herself and also her husband had gone to the field for attending coolie work by leaving their daughter Danamma, aged about five years, being the victim, in the house. When the victim girl was playing in front of the house of the accused, he called her by lured the victim took her to his upstair house and made her to fall on the floor and had a sexual assault on the victim by lifting her inner garments. The complaint was filed by the mother of the victim on 14.09.2014. Based upon her complaint, a case in Crime No. 109/2014 came to be registered. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer who has taken up the investigation as wherein he has recorded the statements of the witnesses and so also drew mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses and laid the charge sheet against the accused in S.C. No. 312/2014 for the offences punishable u/S 376(1) of IPC besides Sec. 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. Subsequent to framing of the charge against the accused, the prosecution in all examined 9 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 9, got marked documents as per Exs.P.1 to 14. Material Objects as per M.Os.1 to 7 are also got marked. Subsequently after recording the incriminating statement against the accused as wherein he has denied the truth of the evidence of the prosecution. Subsequently, the trial Court heard the arguments advanced by the prosecution and the defence counsel for the accused. On appreciation of the evidence on record held conviction against the accused for the offences punishable u/S 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. It is this judgment which is challenged under this appeal.

4. P.W.1 said to be the mother of the victim who has stated in her complaint by narrating the theory by her daughter being P.W.2 that on 07.09.2014 while she was playing in front of the house of the accused, the accused had taken her to upstair house and had sexual assault on her private part. As a result of that, it was paining to the victim. P.W.5, who being a neighbour, deposed that she heard screaming of the victim. This witness was subjected to examination for the prosecution in order to establish the guilt of the accused. P.W.1 was subjected to cross-examination by the defence counsel. But, she did not give an evidence regarding delay in filing of the complaint against the accused as per Ex.P.1. but the incident said to be committed by the accused on her daughter between 07.09.2014 and 13.09.2014, it is in the knowledge of that P.W.1 as well as her mother-in-law, that means to say, the grandmother of the victim was also aware of that incident said to be committed by this accused on the victim girl, who is aged about five years.

5. Whereas the learned counsel for the appellant during the course of his arguments has taken me through the statement of P.W.1 recorded u/S 164 of Cr.P.C. by the concerned Magistrate, which is marked as Ex.P.3. That the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 for the