JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J. - By the present appeal, Naresh challenges the impugned judgment dated 9th November 2017 convicting him for the offence punishable under Sections 8 of POCSO Act in FIR No. 150/2013 registered at PS Hauz Qazi and the order on sentence dated 15th November 2017 directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of forty months and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that there are contradictions in the statements of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Section 164 Cr.P.C and the deposition before the court. There is nothing in MLC to suggest insertion of penis. It is the case of the appellant that he has been falsely implicated in the case due to dispute in the family. Even as per the testimony of the grandfather of the victim there were no seizures made from the house of the appellant belying the prosecution case.

3. Learned APP for the State on the other hand contends that the statements of the victim''s family bring out the case under Section 7 of POCSO Act as touching the private parts of the child victim would amount to an