admits about his addiction in his cross examination which is in fact the defence of the appellant and has not been considered by learned Trial Court. 3. Learned APP for the State on the other hand contends that the MLC of the child victim corroborates the prosecution case. The injuries were 2 to 7 days old and were partially healed. Child victim deposed about one incident only in the Court and the said version is thus required to be accepted. 4. Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on the intervening night of 17th and 18th May, 2013 around 12:00 midnight, one person (elder brother of victim child) came to the police station along with the victim child (PW-5). The victim child got his statement [Ex. PW-5/A] recorded wherein he stated that he resides at the Jhuggi situated in Ashok Vihar, Delhi on rent with his father and elder brother. On 16th May, 2013 around 11:00 P.M., when he was alone at home, the appellant whom he calls Sunil Chacha came to his house. Appellant asked him to come to the terrace to clean his room and throw away the garbage. When he entered the room, appellant held him from his back, gagged his mouth and took him towards the staircase in the dark. The appellant forcibly removed his clothes and forcibly inserted his penis into the victim’s anus. When he shouted out of pain, the appellant gagged his mouth. Thereafter, the appellant forcibly inserted his penis into his mouth and asked him to lick the same. When he refused to do so, the appellant gave him beatings and continued the act (‘ gandi harkat’ ) for almost 1½ hours. When the appellant released him, he came to his room and slept. When his elder brother (PW-7) came, he narrated the incident to him who then brought him to the police station. On the basis of the aforesaid statement, FIR No. 148/2013 [Ex. PW-5/B] was registered under Sections
