IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 140 of 1999 Date of decision: 25.5.2010 State of H.P. Appellant. Versus Ranjit Singh @ Kaku Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant: Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondent: Mr. Loveneesh Kanwar, Advocate. Per Deepak Gupta, J, (oral) 1. This appeal by the State has been filed for enhancement of sentence. The accused was convicted for having committed offences punishable under Sections 366 and 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. 2. It is urged on behalf of the State that this sentence is very low and should be suitably enhanced. Normally, in a case where a person is convicted under Section 376 IPC the minimum sentence prescribed is seven years but the Court for adequate reasons to be recorded in the judgement can impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term less than the said period. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 3. In the present case, the occurrence in question took place on 7.9.1997. Almost 13 years have elapsed and at this stage to enhance the sentence would amount to travesty of justice itself. 4. From the evidence on record, it is more than apparent that the prosecutrix had willingly gone with the accused. She stayed with the accused at various places for a number of days. She never raised any protest. She was a consenting party but the fact was that she was short of 16 years by just a few months. The incident occurred sometime in September, 1997 and she would have turned 16 on 25.12.1997, even as per the record relied by the prosecution. The accused was also only about 20 years at the relevant time. It is also in evidence that he and the prosecutrix had developed a friendship and liking for each other and therefore, the prosecutrix had gone with him. In these circumstances, we feel that there is no reason to enhance the sentence especially when so many years have already elapsed. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The bail bonds furnished by the accused are discharged. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge 25th May, 2010. ( Rajiv Sharma) ™ Judge.