Judgment SOBHAG MAL JAM, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated December 11, 1980, of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1. Hanumangarh, convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence under section 376, I. P. C. to eight years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to one years further Rigorous Imprisonment. ( 2 ) THE victim of the offence is Mst. Indra, aged about eight year. The occurrence took place on March 3, 1980, at about 2. 00 P. M. in Mandi Sangariya. According to the prosecution, Indra was playing under a PEEPAL tree, when the accused took her forcibly in a house and committed rape upon her. Her vagina (Sic) immediately complained to her mother Rama Murti. The First Information Report of the occurrence was lodged at Police Station, Sangariya, where a case under section 376, I. P. C. was registered against the accused. The injuries of Indra were examined at 4. 30 P. M. the same day by Dr. Harbans Kaur, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Sangariya, who found blood coming out from the vagina, her hymen ruptured and posterior viginal wall was teared up to anus. The doctor opined that the girl was subjected to forced intercourse. After investigation, ]the accused was challaned in the Court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate. First Class, Sangariya, who committed him for trial for the offence under section 376, I. P. C. to the Court of Sessions. The trial was held before the Additional Session Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh. ( 3 ) AFTER trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the accused, as aforesaid. Disssatisfied, the accused has filed the present appeal through jail. As the accused was unrepresented. Shri R. K. Charan, Advocate, was appointed as amicus curiae to present the case on his behalf. ( 4 ) I have heard Shri R. K. Charan, Amicus Curiae for the accused and Smt. Sumitra Chouhan, Public Prosecutor for the State. ( 5 ) THE fact-matrix of the prosecution case stand established by the evidence of Indra, the victim of the rape. She was eight years of age when the occurrence look place. She has deposed that the accused took her into a house and committed rape upon her. ( 5 ) THE fact-matrix of the prosecution case stand established by the evidence of Indra, the victim of the rape. She was eight years of age when the occurrence look place. She has deposed that the accused took her into a house and committed rape upon her. Her evidence is corroborated by her mother Ramamurti, to whom she narrated the incident immediately after the occurrence. Her evidence is fully supported by the evidence of Dr. Harbans Kaur, who examined her person and found that her vagina was still bleeding and hymen ruptured. She has opined that Indra was subjected to forced sexual inter-course. I find nothing in the statements of these witnesses to disbelieve their testimony. Their evidence is credible and duly established the fact that the accused committed rape with Indra, a minor aged 8 years. The sentence awarded to the accused, in the circumstances, cannot be said to be excessive. ( 6 ) THERE is no force in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.