The Sikkim High Court in this case clarified the scope of “penetrative sexual assault” under the POCSO Act. The accused, a 60-year-old man, was convicted for sexually assaulting his 5-year-old niece. He challenged the conviction, arguing that there was no complete penetration and therefore the offence should fall under a lesser provision. The Court rejected this argument and held that under Section 3 of the POCSO Act, even partial or minimal penetration is sufficient. The law clearly states that insertion of any object or body part “to any extent” amounts to penetrative sexual assault. In this case, the victim’s statement regarding insertion of a finger was considered clear and reliable, and was further supported by medical evidence showing genital injuries. The Court also emphasised that the testimony of a child victim, if consistent and trustworthy, is sufficient for conviction without the need for further corroboration. Since the victim was below 12 years of age, the offence qualified as aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5(m). Accordingly, the High Court upheld the conviction and 20-year sentence, reinforcing a strict, victim-centric interpretation of the POCSO Act.