Gang rape sentencing and common intention liability upheld where no adequate special reasons justified a sentence below the statutory minimum.

Gang rape is treated as a grave offence against bodily integrity and a woman's dignity, and the victim's testimony may suffice without corroboration. Section 376(2)(g) read with Explanation I deems every member of a group acting in furtherance of common intention to have committed the offence, even if one participant did not personally complete the act. A sentence below the statutory minimum can be imposed only on recorded adequate and special reasons. A lesser sentence based solely on the view that the appellant did not actually commit the rape was not legally sufficient, and the prescribed minimum sentence was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the enhancement of sentence for the appellant's conviction for rape was justified, particularly in view of the statutory minimum sentence for gang rape, the applicability of the deeming provision under Section 376(2)(g), and the absence of adequate and special reasons for imposing a lesser sentence.

Analysis: The offence of rape is treated as a grave offence against the human body and the dignity of a woman. In cases of rape, the testimony of the victim is entitled to great weight and corroboration is not a sine qua non for conviction. For gang rape, the statutory scheme under Section 376(2)(g) read with Explanation I deems every member of a group acting in furtherance of common intention to have committed the offence, even if one of them did not personally complete the act of rape. A sentence below the prescribed minimum can be imposed only if the Court records adequate and special reasons. The only reason given by the trial Court, namely that the appellant had not actually committed the rape, was not a legally sufficient basis to award a lesser sentence, especially when the evidence showed his presence and participation in furtherance of the common intention.

Conclusion: The enhancement of sentence to the prescribed minimum was upheld and the challenge to it failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed and the minimum sentence imposed for the offence was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: In a gang rape case, a participant acting in furtherance of common intention is liable under the deeming provision for the offence itself, and a sentence below the statutory minimum can be imposed only on recorded adequate and special reasons.

---