JUDGMENT A.K. Awasthy, J. Appellant-accused has preferred the appeal against the judgment and order dated 13th November, 2002 delivered in Sessions Trial No. 258/2001 by learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, of his conviction and sentence u/s 376(2)(f) of Indian Penal Code for the imprisonment of life and fine of Rs. 2,000-00 and in default, further RI of six months. The prosecution case is that on 17-9-2001 at about 10.00 a.m. in Village Damdam when the mother of prosecutrix Arti aged 2 years left her in her courtyard and took her son Pankaj for bath, she heard the noise of the weeping of Arti and saw that the accused was trying to put his private part in the vagina of Arti. That on hearing the cries Rekhabai, the neighbors reached on the spot and they saw the accused running from the place where Arti was lying and the blood was oozing from her private part. The FIR Ex. P/2 was lodged by Rekhabai and in the medical examination it was found that the muscles and the skins of the private part of Arti was torn. That during the investigation, U.R. Baman (PW-9) has recorded the statements of witnesses and obtained the report from FSL Indore of the slide taken of the swab of the private part that contained the blood and the semen. The accused has abjured the guilt and pleaded his false implication due to enmity. The appellant has not assailed the finding of the rape by the accused. His limited prayer was of reduction in sentence. Rekha (PW-2) has stated that when after leaving her 2 years daughter in the courtyard she was providing the bath to her son, the cries of Arti were heard and she has found the accused putting his penis in the private part of her daughter. The FIR Ex. P/2 was lodged immediately and on the same day Arti was examined by Dr. S. S. Verma (PW-8). The version of Dr. S. S. Verma (PW-8) is that the vagina of Arti aged 2 and 1/2 years had the cut mark and blood was oozing from the injury. The limited prayer of the appellant is for the clemency in the sentence on the ground that he is the only earning member in his family and he is a rustic poor villager and the act was committed in heat of sexual frenzy. The limited prayer of the appellant is for the clemency in the sentence on the ground that he is the only earning member in his family and he is a rustic poor villager and the act was committed in heat of sexual frenzy. Dealing with the principle of proportionately in sentence, it is observed in the case of Devnarayan Mundala v. State of U.P., 2004 SCC (Cri) 1921 and in case of Rudi Ram v. State of Haryana, 2002 SCC (Cri) 1834 that the punishment should always be proportionate to the crime and while exercising the sentence, the gravity of the offence; the manner in which it is committed; the age; sex of the accused should be taken into consideration and the sentence should be neither excessively high nor ridiculously low and it should commensurate with gravity of offence. The accused took the victim only few steps away from the place where her mother was working and he was doing the alleged offence of rape in open place. Thus, it is clear that the offence was committed without prior concert or prearranged plan. It appears that the accused has lost the control of his passion and he was swayed by the sexual impulse and urge. The accused is bread earner first offender and rustic poor villager and act of accused was impulsive. In view of factual and legal aspect highlighted above, this is not a case where the extreme sentence of imprisonment for life should be awarded. The minimum sentence prescribed will meet the ends of justice. Consequently the appeal is partly allowed and sentence is reduced to 10 years. The appellant accused to undergo the sentence u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code of the rigorous imprisonment of 10 (Ten) years.