DASHRATH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant accused stands convicted under sections 366 and 376, I.P.C., for a period of 4 years and a fine of Rs. 100/- on each count to run concurrently.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused only makes submission on the question of sentence. It is pointed out that the appellant-accused has already suffered six months sentence. My attention is invited to the observations made by the trial Court in paras 21 and 23 of the judgment. In the above paragraphs of the judgment of the trial court, it has been mentioned that the prosecutrix has now started living with the appellant as his wife and has been so recognised by the parents of the prosecutrix. The appellant has to suffer conviction only because on the date of the incident 2-1-1985, the prosecutrix was alleged to be less than 18 years of age.

(3.) In view of the above admitted facts, in my opinion, there are adequate reasons to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to one already undergone. It would be in the interest of both of the prosecutrix and the appellant that conviction of the appellant-accused is maintained but the sentence is reduced to one already undergone.