JUDGMENT Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order passed by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge-2, Nagpur dated 1/8/2008 in Special Criminal Case No.5/2008, whereby the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/ - (Rs.One thousand) in default to suffer R.I. for three months. The appellant was also convicted for offence punishable under Section 3(l)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and for that offence the appellant was convicted and sentenced to suffer RI. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rs. Five hundred), in default to suffer RI. for two months. Further the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer RI. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rs.Five hundred only)in default to suffer R.I. for one month. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. In addition, the appellant was directed to pay compensation to the prosecutrix, in view of Section 357 of Criminal Procedure Code in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty five thousand only). 2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that the prosecutrix Santoshi Ramteke (PW 1) aged about 14 years was studying in 8th standard in Jijamata Vidyalaya, Butibori had gone to bus-stand of Borkhedi on 20/9/2007 at about 11.00 a. m. She had missed her bus for going to attend her school. Thereafter the accused came there by his Maroti van of white colour. 4-5 women passengers were already sat in the van. The accused (appellant) had stopped the van near the prosecutrix and when she inquired as to whether the van is going towards Butibori, the accused replied in the affirmative as there were women passengers in the van. The prosecutrix also boarded in the van but the women passengers got down at Bramhani and the accused questioned her as to whether she is daughter of Rameshwar. Then he stopped the van and came towards her and removed her school dress including underwear. The accused also removed his clothes and established sexual intercourse with her. The accused also pressed her breast. The accused threatened her to commit her murder if she raised shouts. Then he stopped the van and came towards her and removed her school dress including underwear. The accused also removed his clothes and established sexual intercourse with her. The accused also pressed her breast. The accused threatened her to commit her murder if she raised shouts. He had opened the door of the van and tried to carry her somewhere. She shouted. Two persons were passing from the said road on their motorcycle. They both have abused the accused saying "Tula Shobhate ka?" and contacted the police on their mobile. Subsequently, the prosecutrix lodged oral report (Ex.13) and on that basis Crime No. 174/2007 was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. During the investigation of the crime, P.S.I. Shri. Atram referred .the prosecutrix for the medical examination. PW 7 Dr. Suwarna Sapkal examined the prosecutrix and had issued medical certificate. 1 he Investigating Officer PW 4 Atram rushed to the spot and drew the spot panchanama (Ex.17). Thereafter the accused was arrested vide arrest panchanama (Ex.32). Maroti van used in the offence was also seized and articles such as ladies nicker and sandal were also seized from the van. Seat cover stained with blood and school black shoes were also seized. The clothes of the accused were also seized in the course of the investigation. During investigation, the Investigating Officer collected evidence regarding date of birth certificate, school leaving certificate from the school of prosecutrix and her community. In the course of the investigation, blood sample, vaginal swab, cross-match of prosecutrix were also seized. During the course of investigation the articles seized such as blood sample etc., were sent in sealed envelop. The Executive Magistrate was requested to conduct identification parade. The Medical Officer Dr. Nagrare on examination of the accused found him he was capable for intercourse. Upon completion of the investigation, the accused was charge-sheeted in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Nagpur for trial for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with further Section 3(i)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The charge was accordingly framed against the accused at Exhibit 6 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The charge was accordingly framed against the accused at Exhibit 6 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The accused defended in the trial on the ground that he was falsely implicated on the ground that there was quarrel with the father of prosecutrix by him and that he was threatened that he would be involved in the false criminal case. In support of the case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses. 3. The trial Court, upon evidence led concluded that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was raped on 20th September, 2007 at about 11.30 a. m. at the Bramhani inside the van by the accused and that the accused had also committed offence of criminal intimidation by threatening her to commit her murder when she raised shouts. It is also found established by the prosecution that the prosecutrix is belonging to Hindu Mahar community and the accused belongs to Hindu Kunbi community and the accused raped on prosecutrix and thereafter he threatened her and also insulted her after he questioned her as to whether she was daughter of Rameshwar. 4. The trial Court found that the prosecutrix (PW 1) gave evidence before it on material facts that she was student of 8th standard in Jijamata Vidyalaya, Butibori. She used to go to and fro from Borkhedi to Butibori and on the date of incident i.e. 20th September, 2007 she had missed her bus for going to school and at about 11.00 a.m. the appellant had came by Maroti van and told her that he will take her to school. Since there were four or five women passengers in the van. she had boarded in the said van. While the other passengers got down near Bramhani, the accused took advantage of her loneliness. He also questioned her as to whether she is daughter of Rameshwar and after she answered in the affirmative, he had shut down all the glasses of van. He came to her from driver seat to rear seat and removed all her clothes from her person. He had also pressed her chest and committed sexual intercourse upon her under threat if she raises shouts she would be killed. S. The prosecution examined two persons, who had occasion to go by the road on scooter and to whom the prosecutrix had narrated the incident. He had also pressed her chest and committed sexual intercourse upon her under threat if she raises shouts she would be killed. S. The prosecution examined two persons, who had occasion to go by the road on scooter and to whom the prosecutrix had narrated the incident. The Trial Court had also found that the prosecutrix was minor girl at the time of incident on the basis of birth certificate (Ex.62) and that she belongs to Hindu Mahar Baudha community and she did not know about the caste of the accused. The accused is belonging to Hindu Kunbi community. 6. I have heard the submissions at bar and also gone through the evidence led on record before the trial Court, it does appear that the evidence of prosecutrix has been well corroborated by the medical evidence regarding the incident of rape and as such in such cases when the prosecutrix has deposed about forcible sexual intercourse with her under threat committed by the accused, there is no reason to insist upon corroboration as a rule but in the present case the evidence of prosecutrix has received more than sufficient corroboration in respect of the incident of rape. The medical evidence of PW 7 Dr. Suwarna Sapkal indicates that she has examined prosecutrix an unmarried minor girl aged 14 years with history of forcible sexual intercourse. Dr. Suwarna Sapkal also found on external examination of prosecutrix that there was fresh abrasion over the forehead of size 1.5 c.m. transverse possibly caused by a blow from hard and sharp object with age of injury appeared to be more than six hours. On internal examination, the doctor found that public hair were matted. There was abrasion over the labia minora on both sides. 5 to 0.5 cm. small abrasion over the forchette. The injuries were fresh. The hymen was torn. There was blood clot over the hymen. The forchette was intact. Her blood samples. vaginal swab and public hair samples were taken and handed over to W.P.C. Thus, Dr. Suman Sapkal (PW 7) gave clear opinion that in view of fresh abrasion over the labia minora, tom hymen indicating possibility of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. The medical certificate was accordingly issued as per Exhibit 42. Casualty registration papers is at Exhibit 40. Another Medical Officer Dr. Suman Sapkal (PW 7) gave clear opinion that in view of fresh abrasion over the labia minora, tom hymen indicating possibility of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. The medical certificate was accordingly issued as per Exhibit 42. Casualty registration papers is at Exhibit 40. Another Medical Officer Dr. Pradeep Nagrare, who had examined prosecutrix who expressed his opinion about her age on the basis of bone x-ray examination to confirm her age. She was about 15 years or about. The opinion was expressed on the basis of radiological examination as per Exhibit 45. Dr. Nagrale (PW 8) also examined appellant Prashant and found that he was capable of sexual intercourse and issued certificate (Ex.46) on the basis of casualty card at Exhibit 47. Thus, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the trial Court on the basis of evidence led before it and regarding fin ling of guilt recorded against the appellant, in the facts and circumstances of the else that a minor girl aged about 14 years who was belonging to Hindu Mahar community was sexually ravished by the accused under threat to kill her if she raised shouts. 7. Learned Advocate for the appellant on the matter of sentence contended that the appellant has repentance over the crime committed and he had no criminal antecedents and he has old parents aged about 65 years who are dependent upon him. His elder brother has left home and did not come back. His father has only one kidney. Under these circumstances, it is contended that there are special and adequate reasons for reduction of substantive sentence of imprisonment. Learned Advocate for the appellant also offered that close relative of the appellant are ready to deposit compensation in the sum of Rs.50,000/- in stead of Rs.25,000/- awarded to the prosecutrix under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure so as to compensate the prosecutrix with good intention that she shall be able to rehabilitate herself. 8. Learned A.P.P. supported the impugned judgment and order and contended that offence committed was serious and appropriate punishment was imposed against the appellant. He left it to the discretion of this Court, if the compensation amount is enhanced as payable under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the prosecutrix. 9. 8. Learned A.P.P. supported the impugned judgment and order and contended that offence committed was serious and appropriate punishment was imposed against the appellant. He left it to the discretion of this Court, if the compensation amount is enhanced as payable under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the prosecutrix. 9. Under these circumstances considering the submissions on behalf of the accused that his parents are old and dependent upon him, his father had one kidney and his elder brother had left the home and did not come back and the accused has to maintain his parents, I think substantive imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 176 of the Indian Penal Code may be reduced in view of the special reasons pleaded as above which are not disputed. In view of those special reasons, therefore, the substantive sentence of imprisonment may be reduced from R.I. for seven years to R.I. for five years for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and compensation amount granted in favour of the prosecutrix shall be enhanced to Rs.50,000/- in stead of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the trial Court. The impugned judgment and order shall stand modified accordingly. In the matter of sentence for offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused is convicted and sentenced to suffer reduced R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.1.000/- in default to suffer R.I. for three months. and he shall also pay sum of Rs.50,OOO/ - to the prosecutrix as compensation payable under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in stead of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the trial Court. The impugned judgment and order shall stand modified accordingly. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. It is further made clear that total amount of Rs.50.000/- if not paid or deposited within two months from the date of this order, the sentence shall remain unaltered as originally imposed by the trial Court. 10. The appeal is partly allowed and disposed of accordingly. Ordered accordingly.