ORDER Delay condoned. 2. Leave to file special leave petition was granted in appeal filed by Sandhya on 23.10.2017. 3. Leave granted in both the special leave petitions. 4. One Margabandhu, brother of Sandhya, lodged a FIR registered as No. 10/2013 dated 17.5.2013 with the Vellore Police Station alleging that both the brother and sister were working at their uncle Elumalai’s(appellant’s) house and that his sister had informed him that she was raped by the appellant about five months prior. Since the uncle denied the incident, a request for registration of the case was made. Investigation was carried out and medical examination of the prosecutrix was done and the final report was filed. 5. On behalf of the prosecution, the de facto complainant was examined as PW-1 while the prosecutrix was examined as PW-2. The mother of the prosecutrix and Mahazar witnesses were examined as PW 3-5, apart from the Doctor as PW8, who examined the prosecutrix and the Doctor who conducted the test is PW-9. The complainant as well as PWs 3-5 became hostile witnesses. In the course of cross examination, the prosecutrix (PW-2) admitted to the fact that she wanted to marry the appellant/accused. The appellant/accused while recording his statement under Section 313 CrPC 1973 has denied his complicity in the crime. It may also be added here that the victim was less than 16 years of age when the crime had been committed. The Mahila Court(Sessions Court), by its judgment dated 8.7.2014 found the appellant/accused, who was about 25 years of age at the time of incident, guilty of the offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 25,000/-and in failure to pay the fine amount, one year’s rigorous imprisonment. The fine amount was to be paid to the victim PW-2 as compensation after the lapse of the appeal period under Section 357(2) of the CrPC. 6. It appears that a child was born to Sandhya (PW-2). The appellant/accused also married Sandhya in June 2013. 7. The appellant/accused filed an appeal against the conviction and sentence before the Madras High Court but the appeal was dismissed by the impugned order dated 27.10.2015. The appellant accused then filed a special leave petition against the said order while Sandhya, the prosecutrix(PW-2) also filed a special leave petition seeking leave to appeal. 7. The appellant/accused filed an appeal against the conviction and sentence before the Madras High Court but the appeal was dismissed by the impugned order dated 27.10.2015. The appellant accused then filed a special leave petition against the said order while Sandhya, the prosecutrix(PW-2) also filed a special leave petition seeking leave to appeal. Notice was issued limited to the question of quantum of sentence on 23.10.2017. 8. The appellant and the prosecutrix both state that they were living happily and it is the say of the prosecutrix that the continued incarceration of the appellant in jail would cause immense hardship and sufferings to her and she would have to bring up the child alone. We are also informed that the father of the appellant/accused, in order to secure the future of the couple and their child, has settled the cultivable land measuring 20 cents in favour of the prosecutrix. The appellant has been in custody for less than 4 years. 9. We are undoubtedly faced with a dilemma whether sending the appellant/accused behind bars for 10 years would cause a greater trauma to the sufferer, the prosecutrix. The fact that the brother of the prosecutrix made the complaint, and that the marriage took place immediately after the alleged incident, does show that there was a relationship between the two, albeit the prosecutrix was under age. 10. In the given peculiar facts and circumstance of the case and to alleviate any further suffering of the prosecutrix, we are inclined to modify the sentence of the appellant to the period already undergone, exercising our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. We expect that the appellant will take full care of both the wife and the child. The appeals are accordingly disposed of.