I don't believe it can be done "legitimately" in six strokes. Only by "cheating". I have no experience of spoj competitions, but it looks like solutions are accepted automatically by a robot referee (i.e. without a human checking each submitted solution for correctness). With this sort of automated judging, part of the game (lamentably IMHO) is finding a way to trick the robot into accepting an invalid solution. In the past, cheating has been common at codegolf sites with automated judging. For example:

• In The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part IV), I describe a cheat where I exploited the Perl $^T current time variable by submitting my solution to the codegolf server at the precise time when $^T had the required value. My "solution" was incorrect; it worked only at that particular moment in time.
• In a more outrageous example, John Fremlin describes a cheat using System V IPC message queues. His "solution" was utterly bogus; he just tricked the robot into accepting it via a low level exploit of the codegolf server.

In your spoj game, one (bizarre) rule that may be exploitable is:

Score equals to size of source code of your program except symbols with ASCII code <= 32.

Why on earth would they make such an arbitrary rule? This is not true golf IMHO. It's also possible there are bugs in their robot referee or test program for this particular game (e.g. a poor or very small set of fixed test data) which may be exploited. But, to me, this sort of activity is not really golf anymore; it's more akin to finding exploits to hack into web sites.