.{1}. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.17 OF 2008 The State of Maharashtra. ..Appellant. Versus Pravin Ashok Rakh. ..Respondent. .. Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP, for the Appellant-State. Mr.Vikas Shivalkar, Adv. for the Respondent. .. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. DATED : APRIL 02, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned APP for appellant-State and the learned Advocate for respondent-accused. By consent of parties, appeal is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. By judgment and order dated 29th September, 2007 passed in Sessions Case No.256 of 2006, the learned Ad-hoc District Judge-2 & Additional Sessions Judge, Pune convicted the respondent-accused of the offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment to the extent of period of imprisonment already undergone by him and to pay fine .{2}. of Rs.5000/- in default SI for five months. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the sentence imposed on the respondent-accused, the appellant-State has preferred this Appeal. 3. We have perused the impugned judgment and order as well as the evidence produced by the learned APP. The prosecutrix was below 16 years of age. The evidence on record shows that on 27.9.2005 the victim girl left her home to go to school. However, instead of going to school she went with the accused and from there they went to Chinchwad and from there to Lonavala. At Lonavala they stayed at village Aundhe in a rented room as husband and wife for a period of about five months and during this period they both have indulged in sexual intercourse. During that period, both of them worked on a construction site. In the meantime, father of the victim girl on finding her missing and being told that she was last seen in the company of respondent-accused, lodged a complaint against the respondent-accused. After residing at Aundhe, Lonavala for a period of five months, both the victim girl as well as the respondent-accused telephoned their respective brothers. From the .{3}. telephone calls, the victim girl and the respondent-accused came to be traced and they were caught by the police and brought to Pune. 4. There is nothing in the evidence of the victim girl to infer that any inducement was given by respondent-accused or any misrepresentation was made by respondent-accused which caused her to accompany him. The victim girl has not stated that there was any forcible sexual intercourse at any point of time. The evidence on record shows that whatever has happened has happened with the full knowledge and consent of the victim girl. Even during the period that she was residing at Aundhe, Lonavala the victim girl has not made any complaint against the respondent-accused to anyone, nor has she tried to run away or make any complaint to the police or made any attempt to seek help from anyone. At no time she has put up any struggle or raised an alarm. However, as the victim girl was below 16 years of age her consent would be immaterial. From the evidence of the victim girl it is clear that she knew the nature and consequences of her act. The victim girl had the capacity to know the full import of what she was .{4}. doing. Looking to the evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted the respondent-accused of the offence under Section 376 of IPC. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that the sentence imposed on the respondent-accused by the learned Sessions Judge is adequate and the same need not be enhanced. Hence, Appeal for enhancement of sentence is dismissed. (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)