JUDGMENT 1. - The matter was listed on the application for bail (suspension of sentence) filed on behalf of accused-appellant Madan Singh, however, at the request of learned counsel for appellant, not opposed by learned Public Prosecutor, the appeal itself was heard and being disposed of by this judgment. 2. This appeal u/s. 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the judgment dated 30.07.2001 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nimbaheda in Sessions Case No. 58/99 whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted u/s. 376(2)(f) of the IPC and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one years simple imprisonment. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 29.08.1999 at about 7.00 p.m., PW-1 Bhagwanlal lodged a verbal report in Police Station, Bhadesar, stating inter alia therein that on the day of incident there was 'Mausar' in their village and all the members of his family and society were in the village. At that time, his niece Kumari Dhapu, aged 10 years D/o Bherulal was at the well situated in field and was taking care of maize crop. At about 5-5:30 p.m., when Kumari Dhapu was alone there, accused Madan Singh came there and caught hold of Dhapu and after laying her in the maize field committed rape with her. The cries of Dhapu drew attention of the villagers Vishnudutt, Nirbhaylal and Satyanarayan, who were passing nearby and on hearing the cries when they rushed towards the field they saw accused Madan Singh running from the field. Accused fell down on the way and sustained injuries, the villagers caught him. Till then, Dhapu fainted. 4. On the above report Ex.P/1, Case No.249/99 u/s. 376 IPC was registered and a regular FIR Ex.P/2 was chalked out. The investigation commenced and during the course of investigation, accused was arrested in presence of Shyamlal and Badrinath on the very same day i.e. on 29.08.1999 at about 8:15 p.m. through Memo Ex.P/3. His underwear was taken by the police and seized and sealed through Memo Ex.P/4. Kumari Dhapu was medically examined by PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar on 29.08.1999 itself in relation to sexual intercourse with her, the report whereof is Ex.P/10. On 30.08.1999, site was inspected and Memo Ex.P/5, Site map Ex.P/6 were prepared in the presence of Bansidas and Gopainath. His underwear was taken by the police and seized and sealed through Memo Ex.P/4. Kumari Dhapu was medically examined by PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar on 29.08.1999 itself in relation to sexual intercourse with her, the report whereof is Ex.P/10. On 30.08.1999, site was inspected and Memo Ex.P/5, Site map Ex.P/6 were prepared in the presence of Bansidas and Gopainath. The shoes of accused were seized and sealed through Memo Ex.P/7 and the Lehanga of prosecutrix was seized through memo Ex.8 in their presence. Seized material was sent to FSL and Report Ex.P/1 1 was received which showed presence of semen on Kachha of accused and Lehanga of the prosecutrix. The sealed articles were kept in Malkhana. The entries of Malkhana register is Ex.P/12A. Kumari Dhapu was also examined by PW-13 Dr. Ramesh Maheshwari and on the basis of x-ray of wrist elbow, the age of Dhapu was found between 9 to 10 years. The report in this regard is Ex.P/13. Accused Madan Singh was medically examined and he was found sexually potent. The medical examination report is Ex.P/15. 5. After completion of investigation, challan was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate and ultimately it came for trial before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Nimbaheda (to be referred herein as 'trial Court'). 6. A charge u/s. 376 IPC was framed against accused-appellant after hearing both sides on 6.1.2000. Accused denied the charge and claimed trial. 7. In support of its case, prosecution examined in all 14 witnesses and tendered several documents in evidence. After close of prosecution evidence, accused was examined u/s. 313, Cr.P.C. and in his statement he has stated that Onkar had taken away one of the females of their family and for that reason there was enmity. No evidence in defence has been adduced. 8. The learned trial Court, after hearing both sides, convicted and sentenced accused-appellant as indicated hereinabove. 9. Feeling aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.07.2001, the present appeal has been filed. 10. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully examined the material available on record. 11. The learned trial Court on the basis of evidence adduced before it has found that the accused has committed rape with a minor girl and held that the offence against accused stands established. 12. 10. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully examined the material available on record. 11. The learned trial Court on the basis of evidence adduced before it has found that the accused has committed rape with a minor girl and held that the offence against accused stands established. 12. It has been contended by the learned counsel for appellant that in the present case, at best, case u/s. 376/511 has been made out in view of evidence of PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar. According to the learned counsel, she has admitted in her statement that there was only an attempt made which is fortified by her report Ex.P/10. The learned counsel submits that accused is in jail since last 6 years, therefore, looking to the young age of the accused and also the fact that the accused is only bread earner of the family, his sentence be reduced to the period already undergone by him. 13. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor contended that by the prosecution evidence it stands established that accused-appellant committed rape with a minor girl, therefore, leniency is not required. He submits that it is an offence against the society. 14. I have considered the submissions made before me. 15. The law relevant to appreciation the evidence in the cases of child witness in such type of cases may be discussed here so that the matter may be examined in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in such matters. 16. In the case of Narayan Iranna Potkanthi v. State of Maharashtra, 1994 Cr LJ 1752 , it has been observed by the Bombay High Court while appreciating the evidence of a child witness as under : "The reading of her deposition, _ particularly the Marathi version thereof makes one to believe that she was able to narrate in a consistent manner, how she was handled or mishandled on that day and how she reacted to the occurrence in question. We have, therefore, no reason to entertain doubt of intellectual capacity of the witness nor have any reason to suppose that the girl was narrating something that was not true or, that she was induced or influenced to tell before the Court something which was untrue." 17. We have, therefore, no reason to entertain doubt of intellectual capacity of the witness nor have any reason to suppose that the girl was narrating something that was not true or, that she was induced or influenced to tell before the Court something which was untrue." 17. In the case of Madan Gopal Kakkad v. Naval Dubey & Anr., (1992) 3 SCC 204 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that there are series of decisions to the effect that even in cases wherein there is lack of oral corroboration to that of a prosecutrix, a conviction can be safely recorded, provided the evidence of the victim does not suffer from any basic infirmity, and the 'probabilities factor' does not render it unworthy of credence, and that as a general rule, corroboration cannot be insisted upon, except from the medical evidence, where, having regard to the circumstances of the case, medical evidence can be expected to be forthcoming. The Court observed in paras No. 34 & 35 of judgment as under : Merely because the inexperienced medical officer has opined that it was an attempt to commit rape, probably on the ground that there was no sign of complete penetration ... A medical witness called in as an expert to assist the Court is not a witness of fact and the evidence given by the medical officer is really of an advisory character given on the basis of the symptoms found on examination. The expert witness is expected to put before the Court all materials inclusive of the data which induced him to come to the conclusion and enlighten the Court on the technical aspect of the case by explaining the terms of science so that the Court although, not an expert may form its own judgment on those materials after giving due regard to the expert's opinion because once the expert's opinion is accepted, it is not the opinion of the medical officer but of the Court. 18. In para No.37, the Court observed : "We feel that it would be quite appropriate, in this context, to reproduce the opinion expressed by Modi in Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology (Twenty-first Edition) at page 369 which reads thus: "Thus to constitute the offence of rape it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of penis with emission of semen and ruputre of hymen. Partial penetration of the penis within the labia majora or the vulva or pudenda with or without emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration is quite sufficient for the purpose of the law. It is therefore quite possible to commit legally the offence of rape without producing any injury to the genitals or leaving any seminal stains. In such a case the medical officer should mention the negative facts in his report, but should not give his opinion that no rape had been committed. Rape is crime and not a medical condition. Rape is a legal term and not a diagnosis to be made by the medical officer treating the victim. The only statement that can be made by the medical officer is that there is evidence of recent sexual activity. Whether the rape has occurred or not is a legal conclusion not a medical one." 19. At page 226 of the said decision, the Court observed that 'before parting with the judgment, with deep concern, we may point out that though all sexual assaults on female children are not reported and do not come to light yet there is an alarming and shocking increase of sexual offences committed on children. This is due to the reasons that children are ignorant of the act of rape and are not able to offer resistance and become easy prey for lusty brutes who display the unscrupulous, deceitful and insidious art of luring female children and young girls. Therefore, such offenders who are menace to the civilised society should be mercilessly and inexorably punished in the severest terms'. 20. In the case of Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat, (1983) 3 SCC 217 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in relation to appreciation of the evidence as under : (1) By and large a witness cannot be expected to possess a photographic memory and to recall the details of an incident. It is not as if a video tape is replayed on the mental screen. (2) Ordinarily, it so happens that a witness is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element of surprise. The mental faculties therefore cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb the details. (3) The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. (2) Ordinarily, it so happens that a witness is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element of surprise. The mental faculties therefore cannot be expected to be attuned to absorb the details. (3) The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. An object or movement might emboss its image on one person's mind, whereas it might go unnoticed on the part of another. (4) By and large people cannot accurately recall a conversation and reproduce the very words used by the or heard by them. They can only recall the main purport of the conversation. It is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a human tape-recorder. (5) In regard to exact time of an incident, or the time duration of an occurrence, usually, people make their estimates by guess-work on the spur of the moment at the time of interrogation. And one cannot expect people to make very precise or reliable estimates in such matters. Again, it depends on the time-sense of individuals which varies from person to person. (6) Ordinarily a witness cannot be expected to recall accurately the sequence of events which takes place in rapid succession or in a short time span. A witness is liable to get confused, or mixed up when interrogated later on. (7) A witness though wholly truthful, is liable to be overawed by the Court atmosphere and the piercing cross-examination made by counsel and out of nervousness mix up facts, get confused regarding sequence of events, or fill up details from imagination on the spur of the moment. The sub-conscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates on account of the fear of looking foolish or being disbelieved though the witness is giving a truthful and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him. Perhaps it is a sort of a psychological defence mechanism activated on the spur of the moment. 21. Discrepancies which do not go to the root of the matter and shake the basic version of the witnesses therefore cannot be annexed with undue importance. More so when the all important 'probabilities factor' echoes in favour of the version narrated by the witnesses. 22. It is now time to tackle the pivotal issue as regards the need for insisting on corroboration to the testimony of the prosecutrix in sex offence. More so when the all important 'probabilities factor' echoes in favour of the version narrated by the witnesses. 22. It is now time to tackle the pivotal issue as regards the need for insisting on corroboration to the testimony of the prosecutrix in sex offence. This Court, in Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan , has declared that corroboration is not the sine qua non for a conviction in a rape case. The utterance of the Court in Rameshwar may be replayed, across the time-gap of three decades which have whistled past, in the inimitable voice of Vivian Bose, J. who spoke for the Court: "The rule, which according to the cases has hardened into one of law, is not that corroboration is essential before there can be a conviction but that the necessity of corroboration, as a matter of prudence, except where the circumstances make it safe to dispense with it, must be present to the mind of the judge ... The only rule of law is that this rule of prudence must be present to the mind of the judge or the jury as the case may be and be understood and appreciated by him or them. There is no rule of practice that there must, in every case, be corroboration before a conviction can be allowed to stand." 23. In State of Rajasthan v. Om Prakash, (2002) 5 SCC 745 , it has been observed that the evidence of the child is required to be evaluated carefully as the child may be swayed by what others may tell him or her as the child is an easy prey to tutoring. Wisdom requires that the evidence of a child witness must find adequate corroboration before it relied on. The Court further observed as under : "Child rape cases are cases of perverse lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in pursuit of sexual pleasure. There cannot be anything more obscene than this. It is a crime against humanity. Many such cases are not even brought to the light because of the social stigma attached thereto. According to some surveys, there has been a steep rise in child rape cases. Children need special care and protection. In such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the Courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. Many such cases are not even brought to the light because of the social stigma attached thereto. According to some surveys, there has been a steep rise in child rape cases. Children need special care and protection. In such cases, responsibility on the shoulders of the Courts is more onerous so as to provide proper legal protection to these children. Their physical and mental immobility call for such protection. Children are the natural resource of our country. They are the country's future. Hope of tomorrow rests on them. In our country, a girl child is in a very vulnerable position and one of the modes of her exploitation is rape besides other modes of sexual abuse. These factors point towards a different approach required to be adopted. The overturning of a well-considered and well-analysed judgment of the trial Court on grounds like non-examination of other witnesses, when the case against the.respondent otherwise stood established beyond any reasonable doubt was not called for. The minor contradiction of recovery of one or two underwears was wholly insignificant." 24. In the case of Harpal Singh & Anr. v. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1981 SC 361 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under : "Mr. Hardy laid emphasis on the circumstances that no injury was detected on the private parts of the girl and that she was found to have been used to sexual intercourse and argued that it was a case of sexual intercourse by consent. This argument will he of no avail to the appellants if once it is proved that the girl was below 16 years of age, because in that case the question of consent becomes wholly irrelevant." 25. In the case of Visveswaran v. State, 2003 Cri LJ 2548 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed: "...the cases are required to be dealt with utmost sensitivity, Courts have to show greater responsibility when trying an accused on the charge of rape. In such cases, the broader probabilities are required to be examined and the Courts are not to get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies which are not of substantial character. The evidence is required to be appreciated having regard to the background of the entire case and not in isolation. The ground realities are to be kept in view. In such cases, the broader probabilities are required to be examined and the Courts are not to get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies which are not of substantial character. The evidence is required to be appreciated having regard to the background of the entire case and not in isolation. The ground realities are to be kept in view. It is also required to be kept in view that every defective investigation need not necessarily result in the acquittal. In defective investigation, the only requirement is of extra caution by Courts while evaluating evidence. It would not be just to acquit the accused solely as a result of defective investigation. Any deficiency or irregularity in investigation need not necessarily lead to rejection of the case of prosecution when it is otherwise proved." 26. In the case of Dilip & Anr. v. State of M.P., 2002 WLC Cr. 224 (SC) , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under: "The law is well settled that prosecutrix in a sexual offence is not an accomplice and there is no rule of law that her testimony cannot be acted upon and made basis of conviction unless corroborated in material particulars. However, the rule about the admissibility of corroboration should be present to the mind of the Judge. In State of H.P. v. Gian Chand, (2001) 6 SCC 71 , on a review of decisions of this Court, it was held that conviction for an offence of rape can be based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix corroborated by medical evidence and other circumstances such as the report of chemical examination, etc. if the same is found to be natural, trustworthy and worth being relied on. This Court further held: "If evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her statement in material particulars. If for some reason the Court finds it difficult to place implicit reliance on her testimony, it may look for evidence which may lend assurance to her testimony, short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial Court must be alive to its responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations.. 27. The testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial Court must be alive to its responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations.. 27. In Madan Gopal Kaddar v. Naval Dubey, (1992) 3 SCC 204 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that lack of oral corroboration to that of a prosecutrix does not come in the way of a safe conviction being recorded provided the evidence of the victim does not suffer from any basic infirmity, and the 'probabilities of factor' does not render it unworthy of credence, and that as a general rule, corroboration cannot be insisted upon, except from the medical evidence, where having regarding to the circumstances of the case, medical evidence can be expected to be forthcoming. 28. Now, I propose to examine as to whether the prosecutrix at the relevant time was minor or not. 29. PW-4 Kumari Dhapu in her statement has stated her age to be 10 years. PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar in his statement has stated that on 29.08.1999 she examined Kumari Dhapu, aged 10 years. PW-13 Dr. Ramesh Maheshwari in his statement has stated that while he was posted in General Hospital, Chittorgarh, on the basis of x-ray of wrist and elbow he found the age of prosecutrix between 9 to 10 years. He has prepared report Ex.P/13. Nothing has been elicited in the cross examination so as to not to believe the statement made by this witness. Apart from medical evidence, PW-1 Bhagwanlal, who has lodged the report in this case, has stated the age of Kumari Dhapu as 9 years. Kumari Dhapu is niece of PW-5 Vishnudutt, who is younger brother of Bherulal, whose daughter is Kumari Dhapu. He has stated the age of Kumari Dhapu as 10 years. PW-7 Bhagwanlal S/o Tulsiram too has stated the age of the prosecutrix to be 10 years. 30. In view of the evidence of witnesses and the medical report Ex.P/13, it stands amply established that the prosecutrix was 9 to 10 years of age on the date of the incident. 31. The another aspect which now requires scrutiny is whether the present case falls u/s. 376/511 or it is a case falling u/s. 376 where rape was committed with a minor girl? 32. 31. The another aspect which now requires scrutiny is whether the present case falls u/s. 376/511 or it is a case falling u/s. 376 where rape was committed with a minor girl? 32. The contention of the learned counsel for accused-appellant has been that in view of medical evidence the case made out against the appellant is only of attempt to commit rape whereas the contention of learned Public Prosecutor is that ample evidence is available on record to prove that it was a case u/s. 376 as the accused has committed rape with a minor girl. 33. PW-4 is the prosecutrix and she has stated in her statement before the Court that on the day of incident accused came to her field and at about 5.00 p.m. in the evening he caught hold of her and laid her on ground in the field. She has further stated that on that day she was not wearing underwear. Accused lifted her Ghaghara and thereafter undressed himself by removing pant and Chaddi and inserted his penis into her vagina due to which she suffered pain and blood started coming from her vagina. She has further stated that she made. a cry and thereafter Vishnu master, Bhagwanlal and Onkar lal came there. It has further been stated by her that the accused seeing them ran away. She has . stated further that thereafter she was taken by Bhagwanlal and Vishnu Master. She has further stated that the police took her Ghaghara, got her medically examined, and inspected the site. She also stated that on the report she affixed her thumb impression. She has stood the test of a lengthy cross examination conducted from this child witness. She has denied the suggestion that on account of fall in the field she sustained injuries on her vagina. She has stated in specific terms that accused caught hold of her and laid her on the ground in the field and thereafter removed his pant and Chaddi, lifted her Ghaghara and inserted his penis into her vagina. The evidence of this witness finds corroboration from the medical evidence. 34. PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar has stated that on 29.08.1999 when she was posted in the General Hospital, Chittorgarh as Medical Officer, on that day on the request of Medical Jurist Dr. The evidence of this witness finds corroboration from the medical evidence. 34. PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar has stated that on 29.08.1999 when she was posted in the General Hospital, Chittorgarh as Medical Officer, on that day on the request of Medical Jurist Dr. Dilip Sharma she examined Kumari Dhapu, aged 10 years and found that her vagina admitted just tips of little finger. She found the hymen of the prosecutrix intact. Two minor abrasions of 5 cm x 2 cm on the right side of chest were found. According to her, around the hymen there was redness and tenderness. She has stated that vaginal swab of the prosecutrix was taken for examination and she recorded her opinion that there was attempt of rape on her. She has stated that report Ex.P/10 was prepared by her. In the last line of her examination-in-chief she has stated that after perusal of FSL report Ex.P/11 she was of the opinion that rape was committed with Kumari Dhapu as in the FSL report human semen was detected on Katcha and Lehanga. She has stated in the cross examination that she has read Mody's Jurisprudence. She has further stated that the abrasions may be the result of inserting fingers. She has further stated that at the time of intercourse even if the dis 'barge is outside then too it is quite possible that the semen will enter in the vaginal canal. 35. In other evidence, PW-1 Bhagwanlal, PW-5 Vishnudutta, PW-6 Onkar and PW-7 Bhagwanlal have supported the version of prosecutrix. They have stated that they have seen accused running from the place. They have also stated that prosecutrix told them about the rape. 36. In view of above statements of the prosecution witnesses, it has clearly come on record that the prosecutrix at the relevant time was a girl of minor age and she was subjected to rape. The argument of learned counsel is not liable to be accepted because it is not necessary that there should be rupture of hymen. In Ex.P/1 1 FSL report, the Chaddi and Ghaghara gave positive result about the presence of human semen. It is not necessary that the rape should be committed for long time. The argument of learned counsel is not liable to be accepted because it is not necessary that there should be rupture of hymen. In Ex.P/1 1 FSL report, the Chaddi and Ghaghara gave positive result about the presence of human semen. It is not necessary that the rape should be committed for long time. It is the case of the prosecution where accused laid the prosecutrix on ground and inserted his penis into the vagina of prosecutrix at that very moment the prosecutrix made cries and some of the persons came there and the accused having discharged ran away and in that process he fell down and caught. 37. A perusal of Secs. 375 & 376 IPC show that in such circumstances it can well be presumed that an act of intercourse by accused with prosecutrix has been taken place. The argument of learned counsel has been that since the doctor has said that it was only an attempt as per report Ex.P/13, therefore, the case will not traverse beyond Section 376/511 of the IPC. I do not agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the simple reason that though PW-9 Dr. Hemlata Bhatnagar in the examination has stated that there was an attempt to commit rape but after seeing the report, in her cross examination, she has confirmed that rape was committed with the prosecutrix. In fact, it appears that in the middle of the statement she made the statement without taking into consideration the relevant material for recording opinion but after seeing the report Ex.P/11 she immediately corrected herself and stated that rape was committed. No evidence was brought on record to suggest enmity. Further, it is to be seen that no respectable person of the society will file a false complaint with the averment that someone committed rape on his niece/daughter without rape being committed. The child witness was cross-examined at length running into several pages. An innocent child of the age of 9 to 10 years has suffered the agony of rape and thereafter in the Court such a lengthy cross examination, which establishes the fact that she was subjected to rape. Thus, there is no difficulty in reaching to the conclusion that it was the accused who committed rape with Kumari Dhapu. 38. An innocent child of the age of 9 to 10 years has suffered the agony of rape and thereafter in the Court such a lengthy cross examination, which establishes the fact that she was subjected to rape. Thus, there is no difficulty in reaching to the conclusion that it was the accused who committed rape with Kumari Dhapu. 38. Now the contention of the learned counsel that requires examination is as to whether since the accused has been in jail for last about 6 years, whether any leniency is required to be taken particularly taking into consideration that the accused are the only bread earners of their families and before them lies their entire future. 39. In Kalikuddin (supra), at paras 7 & 8 of the judgment, the Court has observed: "Section 376(1) IPC provides that the punishment for such an offence shall not be less than seven years but a proviso has been added which provides that the Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than seven years. Learned counsel contended that in view of the consent of the victim, lessor sentence may be awarded. Reliance was placed upon Ummaid Nath v. State of Rajasthan, 1999 (2) RCC 1383 , wherein the age of the prosecutrix was found below 16 years at the time of occurrence and the prosecutrix went with the accused willingly and thus the rigorous imprisonment of ten years u/s. 376 IPC was reduced to five years rigorous imprisonment. In Rajan & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan, 2002 (1) Cr LR (Raj.) 778 , the age of the girl was found thirteen and half years i.e. below 16 years at the relevant time and she was found a consenting party, therefore, in view of the proviso to Section 376(1)IPC, the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment awarded by the trial Court was reduced to three years rigorous imprisonment. In the present case the accused-appellant has served the sentence for more than a period of three years and six months and keeping in view the entire discussion made hereinabove, and in light of the two judgments of this Court, it would meet the ends of justice to sentence the accused- appellant with the sentence already undergone." 40. In the present case the accused-appellant has served the sentence for more than a period of three years and six months and keeping in view the entire discussion made hereinabove, and in light of the two judgments of this Court, it would meet the ends of justice to sentence the accused- appellant with the sentence already undergone." 40. In the aforesaid case, this Court relying on the decisions rendered in the case of Ummaid Nath v. State of Rajasthan, 1999 (2) RCC 1383 and Rajan. & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan, 2002 (1) Cr LR (Raj.) 778 and after assigning reasons reduced the sentence of accused from 5 years to 31/2 years. 41. In Nekiya's case (supra) this Court found the age of the prosecutrix above 16 years and taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances reduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years. 42. In Kallem Shankar Reddy's case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court taking into consideration the age of the accused to be 28 years, reduced his sentence from 10 years to 7 years. 43. A perusal of the observations made in the above authorities indicate that the Court after assigning reasons has awarded minimum sentence to the accused while considering the quantum of sentence. 44. After having considered the entire matter and also taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel that the accused is a young person who is the only bread earner of his family and his kids who have now grown up need his supervision, I deem it proper to reduce his sentence u/s. 376 (2)(f) to a term of 7 years with fine of 5,000/-, in default, to further suffer one years simple imprisonment and modify the order of learned trial Court to that extend. 45. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and while maintaining the conviction of accused appellant u/s. 376 (2)(f), he is sentenced for a term of 7 years and fine of 5,000/-, in default of payment to further undergo one years simple imprisonment. To that extent, the order of learned trial Court stands modified.Appeal partly allowed. *******