The sole testimony of the prosecutrix can be relied upon if it inspires confidence in the mind of the Court, and corroboration is not a requirement of law but a guidance of prudence under given circumstances.

JUDGMENT :

Siddharth Mridul, J.

The present appeal instituted under the provision of section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') assails the judgment dated 27.04.2018 and the order on sentence dated 14.05.2018, rendered by the learned Additional Session Judge-01, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi, in Session Case No.440846/2016, title as 'State vs. Mahabir Mehto', emanating from F.I.R No. 216/2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'subject FIR') under sections 376/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and under sections 6/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'POCSO'), registered at Police Station-Baba Haridas Nagar.

2. By the way of the impugned judgment dated 27.04.2018, Mahabir Mehto (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') has been convicted for the commission of offences punishable under the provisions of section 506 (Part I) IPC and sections 6/5 POCSO. By way of the impugned order on sentence dated 14.05.2018, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, along with fine Rs.15,000/-, for the offence punishable under section 6 read with section 5(n) of POSCO. In default of the payment of fine, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Further, for the offence punishable under the provision of section 506(Part I), IPC, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of two years, along with fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

3. The gravamen of the charge, for which the appellant has been convicted, is for having committed penetrative sexual assault on his daughter, the prosecutrix, a girl aged about 15 years, at the time of commission of the offence.

4. The facts, as elaborated by the trial court are extracted in extenso, as follows: -

"2. Law was set into motion against the accused on the basis of a complainant lodged by his sister on 04.09.2013. In her complaint, the complainant stated that on 02.09.2013, the accused had come to stay with her along with his family consisting of his wife, elder daughter (i.e. the prosecutrix) aged 16 years, younger daughter aged 4 years and son aged 8 years. She alleged that on 03.09.2013, when the prosecutrix was doing household chores, she noticed an unusual bulge in her belly. Upon being inquired, the prosecutrix revealed to her that the accused had been establishing physical relations with her for the last one year by threatening her and that as a result thereof, she had become pregnant. When the complainant confronted the accused about the same, he fled away from the house with his younger daughter. On the basis of the above complaint, FIR under Sections 376/506 IPC was registered against the accused. The prosecutrix was medically examined on the same day. She was found to be having pregnancy of 28 weeks. Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 07.09.2013. In her statement, she supported the contents of FIR and disclosed that she had told about the acts of the accused to her mother but she did not do anything as she was of unsound mind. During the course of investigation, Sections 6 and 10 POCSO Act were added. The accused was arrested on 15.09.2013. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed.

3. It is a matter of record that the prosecutrix gave birth to a male child and that the said child had been given in adoption by the orphanage Sewabharti Matrichhaya.

4. On 08.01.2014, the charge for the commission of offence punishable under Section 6 read with Section 5(n) POCSO Act and Section 506 IPC was framed by the Ld. Predecessor against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial."

5. By way of the order dated 08.01.2014, the charge for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 6 read with Section