As per case facts, the victim's mother, after leaving for work, was informed by a neighbor that her daughter was injured. The neighbor witnessed the appellant sexually assaulting the child. ... The victim was hospitalized, and an FIR was registered, leading to a final report for offenses under POCSO Act. The Trial Court convicted the appellant, who then filed this criminal appeal. The question arose whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the victim was a child and that the appellant committed penetrative sexual assault under the POCSO Act, and if any investigative lapses created reasonable doubt, warranting interference with the Trial Court's decision. Finally, the High Court re-appreciated the evidence, finding no reason to interfere. It confirmed that the prosecution proved the appellant's guilt for sexually assaulting the four-year-old victim, dismissing the appeal and upholding the conviction and sentence.