JUDGMENT :

F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.

1. The sole Appellant is before us. The challenge is to the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad dated 05.03.2008, in Criminal Appeal No. 764 of 2006. The Appellant was proceeded against for the offences punishable Under Sections 363, 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years, along with fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence Under Section 363 Indian Penal Code; he was further sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years, along with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence Under Section 376 Indian Penal Code. The trial Court also punished the Appellant Under Section 506 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year, along with fine of Rs. 1000/- with default sentence of two months' rigorous imprisonment.

2. The High Court by the impugned judgment, though confirmed the conviction and sentence for the offences Under Sections 363and 376 Indian Penal Code, set aside the sentence for the offence Under Section 506 Indian Penal Code.

3. Brief facts which are required to be stated are that PW-3, the prosecutrix, was aged about 15 years at the time when the offence was committed and she was doing her XIth standard in a Junior College. Her father was a Police Head Constable. The prosecutrix was residing with her parents, sister and two younger brothers in the government quarter of her father in Police Line, at Latur. She had a flair for music and used to participate in singing Bhajans. The Appellant who is also stated to be a musician and a singer, developed acquaintance with the prosecutrix due to her participation in Bhajan programmes along with him and he allured her by stating that if she goes along with him to Hyderabad to prepare audio cassettes of her Bhajans and songs, she can make lot of money.

4. On 18.09.2005, in the morning when the prosecutrix was all alone in her house, the Appellant is alleged to have approached her and persuaded her to go along with him to Hyderabad and when she informed him that she had no money to spend, the Appellant is stated to have asked her to bring the ornaments from her house, which can be used for the purpose of going to Hyderabad and told her that a lot of money can be earned through the recording of audio cassettes of the prosecutrix's Bhajansongs. The Appellant is stated to have succeeded in his allurement and inducement, which ultimately resulted in the prosecutrix going along with the Appellant and after going to Hyderabad and from there to a relative's house at Karnool (Andhra Pradesh) in the wee hours, the Appellant is alleged to have committed forcible sexual intercourse by confining her in the said place for a month and twenty days. During the said period, the Appellant is stated to have indulged in the said offence repeatedly, till he himself brought her back to Latur, when he came to know that a complaint has been lodged. It is in the above stated background that the Appellant was proceeded against for the offence of kidnapping, rape and criminal intimidation, which ultimately resulted in his conviction and the sentence imposed upon him as confirmed by the High Court in the impugned judgment.

5. In support of the case of the prosecution, PWs-1 to 13 were examined and a number of exhibits were also marked. For our present purpose, it will be sufficient to refer to the evidence of Tukaram Nagnath Surwase (PW-1), the prosecutrix (PW-3) and Dr. Aruna Varte (PW-8), the doctor who examined the prosecutrix, the Head Mistress (PW-11) and the Head Master (PW-12) of the school in which the prosecutrix pursued her school education.

6. PW-1, Tukaram Nagnath Surwase, who is the father of the prosecutrix, lodged the complaint, Exhibit-26. PW-3 is the prosecutrix. PW-8 is Dr. Aruna Varte, who examined