JUDGMENT

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Since the only question involved in this appeal is whether learned Single Judge was justified in reducing the sentence, as imposed by the High Court on the respondent, detailed reference to the factual aspects is unnecessary.

3. The respondent faced trial for offences punishable under Sections 376(1) read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short `the IPC) and Sections 324 and 452 IPC. For the first offence, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default stipulations. For the second offence, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations. Similarly, for the last offence, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulations.

4. He preferred an appeal before the High Court and the High Court, by the impugned order, held that since the respondent had undergone imprisonment for about five months and 25 days, the sentence should be reduced to the period already undergone in respect of the first offence.

5. The State of Madhya Pradesh h