JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted on the limited question of the mode of sentence.

(2.) The finding recorded by the courts below is that offence under Section 376 Indian Penal Code was made out solely on the ground that the prosecutrix was below 16 years of age (found to be around 15 years of age) even though she was a willing party to go with the appellant and have sex with him. The appellant, on the other hand, was found to be of 17 years of age. Evidently, the appellant and the prosecutrix, in the flush of youth, have committed an act which is a crime insofar as the appellant is concerned. Since it was a onetime act and not a continuous course of conduct, we, having regard to this aspect as also the young age of the appellant, reduce his sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone under both counts, i. e. , under S. 376 and 366 Indian Penal Code, but add a fine of Rs 12,000. 00 to the count under Section 376 while sustaining the fine of Rs 500. 00 imposed under Section 366 together with the default clause. In case there is default in payment of the fine now added, then he shall undergo further imprisonment equivalent to the unexpired portion of his sentence as imposed by the High court. The fine of Rs 12,000. 00 if paid or recovered, shall be paid over to Sarabjit Kaur, the prosecutrix, as compensation. The court of Session is to oversee compliance.

(3.) The appeal is, thus, disposed of.