The appellant has been convicted for an offence under section 366 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one year by the Court below. Being aggrieved, he has preferred this criminal appeal. It was alleged that on 24.5.1885 the appellant kidnapped one minor girl Veena with the help of co-accused persons so as to compel her to have sexual intercourse with the appellant. It was further alleged that in between 24.5.1985 to 10.6.1985, when the prosecutrix Veena recovered, she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the appellant. The appellant was charge sheeted for the offences under sections 366 and 376 IPC and other co-accused persons were charge sheeted for an offence under section 366 IPC. All the co-accused persons were acquitted. The appellant was also acquitted of the charge under section 376 IPC, but convicted for an offence under section 366 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one year as aforesaid. Being aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this criminal appeal. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the conviction of the appellant for an offence under section 366 IPC is well founded and, therefore, calls for no interference. The conclusions reached by the Court below in paragraph 12 of its impugned judgment that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix Veena Gupta was less than 18 years is based on evidence on record as discussed in paragraphs 5 to 11 of the impugned judgment. Consequently if she was allured to run away from the custody of her parents, who happened to be her natural guardian the appellant was guilty of an offence under section 366 IPC. Accordingly the conviction calls for no interference. The learned counsel for the appellant also did not say anything much against the conviction of the appellant. So far as the sentence is concerned, the learned counsel submitted that the appellant has already remained in jail for about a period of about 7 1/2 months and, therefore, looking to the age and circumstances of the case it would meet the ends of justice if the period of imprisonment is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant. I find substance in the contention. I find substance in the contention. In paragraph 20 of the impugned judgment the Court below has written a definite finding that the sexual intercourse was with the consent of the prosecutrix. It appears from the evidence brought on record that the appellant and the prosecutrix wanted to live together as husband and wife. Under these circumstances, I am also of the view that it would meet the ends of justice if the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant. In the result, this appeal partly succeeds and it is hereby partly allowed. The conviction of the appellant under section 366 IPC is maintained, but his sentence of one year's R.I. reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds shall stand discharged.