Is mere delay in lodging the complaint in a sexual offence case fatal to the prosecution where the delay is properly explained?

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss.5(l), 6, 29 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.366 — Age of the victim — Consent immaterial — Sole testimony of the victim — Delay in lodging the complaint — Statutory presumption — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Minor victim — Consent — Held: Once it is established that the victim was a minor, the question of consent becomes insignificant. (¶32) Evidence — Sole testimony of the victim — Held further: The sole testimony of the victim is sufficient to convict an accused where that testimony is of sterling quality and inspires the confidence of the Court. (¶27, 28) Criminal law — Sexual offences — Delay in lodging the complaint — Held further: Mere delay in lodging the complaint in a sexual offence case is not by itself fatal to the prosecution where the delay is properly explained. (¶30) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s.29 — Statutory presumption — Held further: The statutory presumption under s.29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 operates once the prosecution establishes the foundational facts. (¶33) Conviction and sentence confirmed; appeal dismissed. (¶34, 35)