JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal arises out of the judgment of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindon city in Sessions case No. 54/97 delivered on 31.8.2000 whereby, learned Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:Under Section 376 I.PC.: 7 Years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, further 3 months S.l. Under Section 323, 312 I.PC.: 3 months S.I. on each count. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant urging that both the accused and the prosecutrix are of advanced age and married. Such an incidence between adult persons who have attained the age of discretion cannot happen without there being any background of such exchange of vibes. Learned counsel for the appellant further stressed that the total sentence awarded in the case of seven years and the accused has already undergone more than three and half years substantive sentence. 3. The effect of sentence has already taken place in the accused and he feels remorseful and under the compulsion of remorse, he offers compensation to the prosecutrix for the trauma caused to her. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the financial assistance offered by the accused would be of some help to the prosecutrix in settling her position in the society and after the accused having already served three and half years of substantive sentence, further confining him in the jail would not in any case gain anything. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor per contra submitted that the offence is heinous one and a serious stigma has been caused to the prosecutrix. Mandatory sentence is provided, therefore, reduction of sentence is not called for in any circumstances. 5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the facts of the case and have perused the record. The learned counsel for the appellant has offered that the appellant .will pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the prosecutrix. If his substantive sentence is reduced to the already undergone which is more than three and half years. The offer appears to be plausible because the effect of imprisonment should be deemed to be already taken place because three and half years is not a small period. Since, the accused feels remorseful and under the compulsion of remorse, he has come out with an offer of compensation to be paid to the prosecutrix. The offer appears to be plausible because the effect of imprisonment should be deemed to be already taken place because three and half years is not a small period. Since, the accused feels remorseful and under the compulsion of remorse, he has come out with an offer of compensation to be paid to the prosecutrix. Cash compensation offered in rural circumstances appears to be of a sizeable sum. I feel that the substantive sentence can be ordered to be reduced to be already undergone provided the accused deposits a sum of Rs. 20,000/- in the court to be paid to the prosecutrix. 6. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed. If the accused Ratiram S/o Buddhi deposits a sum of Rs. 20,000/-, his substantive sentence should be deemed to be on which he has already undergone. In case of failure, the substantive sentence awarded would stand. The accused is in custody. If he deposits the amount ordered aforesaid before the trial court, he be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. To the above extent, the impugned judgment stands modified.Appeal partly allowed. *******