Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-Section 3(2)(v)-Applicability of Rape of eight year old Scheduled Caste (SC) girl-No evidence that rape was committed on the victim since she was a member of the SC-Held, s.3(2) (v) of the Atrocities Act not inapplicable- Hence, life imprisonment earlier awarded by Courts below by applying s.3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act reduced to 10 years imprisonment-Crime against Women-Penal Code, 1860-Section 376(2)(f).

Penal Code, 1860:

Section 228-Enactment of Object-To prevent social victimization or ostracism of the victim of sexual offence-Hence, it would be appropriate that in the judgments, be it of Supreme Court, High Court or lower Court, the name of the victim is not indicated.

Section 376-Rape-Is a crime against basic human rights-It is also violative of the victim's Right to Life contained in Article 21 of the Constitution Courts therefore expected to deal with cases of sexual crime against women with utmost sensitivity Constitution of India, 1950-Article 21.

Section 376(2) and proviso Rape of minor-Normal sentence where rape is committed on a child below 12 years of age is not less than 10 years' RI-But in exceptional cases "for special and adequate reasons" to be mentioned in the judgment, Court may Impose lesser sentence-Whether there exist any "special and adequate reasons" would depend upon peculiar facts and circumstances of each case-No hard and fast rule can be laid down in that regard-Interpretation of Statutes-Proviso.

According to the prosecution, an 8 year old Scheduled Caste girl was sexually assaulted by accused-appellant when the victim was coming back to her house at mid-night after attending a marriage reception. Trial Court found the Appellant guilty under Section 376(2) IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and directed him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-. The State was directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the victim.

In appeal to this Court, it was submitted that the evidence is not a credible and cogent; that there are many inconsistencies in the evidence, more particularly, of the victim; that this is not a case where life Imprisonment could have been awarded and that in any event, there is no material to bring in application of Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocities Act.

Dismissing the appeal, the Court.