J U D G M E N T

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

1. There can be no manner of doubt that a conviction for committing penetrative sexual assault can be sustained on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix. [Ref: State (GNCT Of Delhi) vs. Vicky @ Karan & Anr. reported as 2019 (1) JCC 322; State (GNCT Of Delhi) vs. Kuldeep @ Kallu & Anr. reported as 2019 (1) JCC 298 (Del); Boby vs. State, Crl.A 1119/2014; Vishnu (alias) Undrya vs. State of Maharashtra reported as (2006) 1 SCC 283; State of M.P vs. Dayal Sahu, reported as (2005) 8 SCC 122)]. However, it is equally well established that, the testimony of the prosecutrix must be creditworthy and inspire confidence.

2. The State has instituted the present petition seeking grant of leave to assail the judgment dated 30.05.2018, in Session Case No.21/2013, arising out of FIR No.19/2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘subject FIR’) under sections 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with sections 04 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO’) registered at Police Station-Begumpur, Delhi; whereby the respondent Jitender Sharma was acquitted of the aforementioned charges.

3. The gravamen of the charge, for which the appellant has