JUDGMENT

1. The present appeal has been filed seeking setting aside the judgment dated 18th September, 2021 and the order on sentence dated 26th November, 2021, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) (POCSO Act) – 01, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 342/363/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual OffencesAct, 2012 (POCSO).

2. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of twelve years for the conviction under Section 6 of the POCSOAct and three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 363 of the IPC and six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 342 of the IPC.

3. The brief facts of the case as set up by the prosecution are as follows:

3.1 The victim, a girl child of four and a half years, was playing in the street outside her house on 11th June, 2017. When the mother of the victim could not find the victim, she sent her husband, being the father of the victim, to look for her. The father of the victim reached the house of the appellant, who was their neighbour and knocked at the door which was locked from inside. He also called for the victim but there was no response. The father of the victim, after some time, again went to the house of the appellant and called for the victim and received her response from inside the door. After a couple of minutes, the appellant dressed in his underwear opened the door and the victim was found present inside the room.

3.2 The father of the victim brought the victim back to their house and told the mother of the victim about the incident. The victim then informed her mother that the appellant took the victim to his house, gave her ‘Mango Frooti’ and after removing her underwear, inserted his finger inside her private parts.

3.3 After hearing about the unfortunate incident that happened with their daughter, the parents informed the police. The police on the basis of the statement of the mother registered the FIR No. 72/17 under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 4/6 of the POCSO Act at Police Station Gulabi Bagh. The statement of the victim under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) was also recorded and the accused was sent for his medical examination.

3.4 The victim along with her parents and a police official went to the Hindu Rao Hospital, where her medical examination was conducted and the MLC [Exhibit PW4/B] was prepared by the concerned doctor.

3.5 The appellant was arrested on 12th June, 2017 and subsequently, the charge sheet was filed.

4. The Sessions Court after examining the witnesses, analysing the evidence and hearing the arguments convicted the appellant for the offences under Sections 342/363/376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSOAct.

5. The counsel appearing for the appellant has made the following submissions:

I. There are material contradictions in the statement of the victim.

Whereas the victim in her deposition before the Trial Court as well as in her statement under Section 161 of the CrPC has stated that the appellant had inserted his finger in her private parts, however, in her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC given to the Magistrate, she has stated that the appellant had only touched her private parts.

II. The mother of the victim in the FIR has only mentioned regarding the appellant touching the private parts of the victim and no mention of penetration has been made.

III. The entire case of the prosecution rests only on the sole testimony of the victim and has not been corroborated by the medical evidence on record. He submits that the testimony of the victim cannot be relied upon without corroboration as the same suffers from material contradictions. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in State (NCT of Delhi) v. Om Prakash, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11262.

IV. The MLC Report records that there was no redness, bite marks or sign of ex