Reportable  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

      CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 749 OF 2007

BALDEV SINGH & ORS.       ......Appellant (s)

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB              .....Respondent  (s)   

                O R D E R

This appeal has been filed against the impugned  

judgment dated 27.0.2005 IN CRLA No. 242 of 1999 of the  

High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.    

The facts of the case have been set out in the  

judgment  of  the  High  Court  and  hence  we  are  not  

repeating the same here, except where necessary.  

The  prosecution  case  is  that  on  03.03.1997  at  

about 6.30 A.M. the prosecutrix was coming to her house  

after answering the call of nature. The three appellants  

caught her and took her into a house and raped her and  

beat  her.   After  police  investigation  the  appellants  

were charge sheeted,  and after a trial were convicted  

under Section 376 (2) (g) and Section 342  I.P.C. and  

sentenced to 10 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs.  

1,000/-  each.   The  sentence  was  upheld  by  the  High  

Court, and hence this appeal.   

Admittedly the appellants have already undergone,  

about 3 and ½ years imprisonment each.  The incident is  

14 years old.  The appellants and the prosecutrix are

married  (not to each other).  The prosecutrix  has also

-1-

-2-

two children.  An application and affidavit has been  

filed before us stating that the parties want to finish  

the  dispute,  have  entered  into  a  compromise  on  

01.09.2007, and that the accused may be acquitted and  

now there is no misunderstanding between them.   

Section  376  is  a  non  compoundable  offence,  

However, the fact that  the incident is an old one, is a  

circumstance for invoking the proviso to Section 376 (2)  

(g) and awarding a sentence less than 10 years, which is  

ordinarily the minimum sentence under that provision, as  

we think that there are adequate and special reasons for  

doing so.   

On the facts of the case, considering that the  

incident happened in the year 1997 and that the parties  

have themselves entered into a compromise, we uphold the  

conviction of the appellant but we reduce the sentence  

to the period of sentence already undergone in view of  

the proviso to Section 376 (2) (g) which for adequate  

and  special  reasons  permits  imposition  of  a  lesser  

sentence.  However, we direct that each of the appellant  

will pay a sum of Rupees 50,000/- by way of enhancement  

of fine to the victim envisaged under Section 376 of the

IPC itself.  The fine shall be paid within three months  

from today.  In the event of failure to pay the enhanced  

amount of fine it will be recovered as arrears of land  

revenue and will be given to the victim.   

-3-

The appeal is disposed off.        

...................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]

...................J. [GYAN SHDHA MISRA]

NEW DELHI; FEBRUARY 22, 2011