JUDGMENT GHANSHYAM PRASAD, J.:- The sole appellant Md. Shahid @ Chhotu was found guilty for the offence under section 376 I.P.C. and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. 2. On 11.3.1997 in the evening the victim Farzana @ Rozi (P.W.6) aged about eight years was playing along with some other children on street situated near her house. In the meantime, the accused appellant who is a co-villager came, forcibly lifted the girl, gagged her mouth, brought her in a dilapidated abundant house situated nearby, threw her on the ground, committed rape upon her and thereafter, fled away leaving the girl alone in the house. As a result of rape the victim began to bleed from her private part and she also developed pain in her stomach. She anyhow managed to return to her house at about 8 P.M. and fell down on Varandah with pool of blood. On enquiry by her mother Rehana Khatoon P.W.8, who is informant she narrated the entire occurrence and told that the accused appellant Md. Shahid @ Chhotu committed rape upon her after gagging her mouth. 3. In the same night, the informant brought the victim along with blood stained clothes to Phulwarisharif Police Station where on the statement of the informant (Ext.3) the police registered case against the accused appellant. The police S.I. Chandeshwar Prasad Singh (P.W.7) took up investigation, seized blood stained clothes and sent the victim girl Farzana to P.M.C.H. for medical examination. Thereafter, he visited P.O., recorded statement of victim and other witnesses and sent the blood stained clothes to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. After receipt of medical report and report of Forensic Science the police submitted charge sheet against the accused appellant. 4. In course of the trial, the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses out of whom p.w.8 Rehana Khatoon is the informant and mother of the prosecutrix Farzana. P.W.6 Farzana is the victim her self and P.W.7 Chandeshwar Prasad Singh is the 1.O. of the case. Other witnesses are; P.W.1, Md. Eqbal, P.W.2 Md. Kamal, P.W3, Md. Shamim, P.W.4 Md. Sharfuddin and P.W.5 Md. Zafiruddin. 5. The learned lawyer for the appellant challenged the judgment in question and submitted that the court below has not properly appreciated either the oral or documentary evidence. Other witnesses are; P.W.1, Md. Eqbal, P.W.2 Md. Kamal, P.W3, Md. Shamim, P.W.4 Md. Sharfuddin and P.W.5 Md. Zafiruddin. 5. The learned lawyer for the appellant challenged the judgment in question and submitted that the court below has not properly appreciated either the oral or documentary evidence. It was further submitted that the conviction under section 376 I.P.C. is bad due to non - examination of doctor and independent witness. It was further submitted that no implicit reliance can be placed on the victim who was only eye witness of the case since she was a child witness. 6. It is well settled principle that in rape case conviction can be recorded mere on sole testimony of prosecutrix and there is no legal compulsion to look for corroboration from any other corner. In the present case, the evidence of prosecutrix coupled with circumstances is enough to record the guilt of the accused appellant without looking for further corroboration though enough is available on the record. 7. P.W.6 is prosecutrix. At the time of her evidence, she was aged about 10 - 11 years. The learned lower court after being satisfied about her competency to depose has recorded her evidence. She has given detail description of the occurrence and has stated that the accused appellant, while she was playing in the street, forcibly lifted her, gagged her mouth, brought in nearby abundant house and committed rape as a result of which she began bleeding from her private part. It appears from her evidence that immediately after return to her house she disclosed about the occurrence to her mother Rehana Khatoon (P.W.8) and other witnesses. This fact has been corroborated not only by P.W.8 but by almost all witnesses examined by the prosecution. 8. P.W.8 Rehana Khatoon is the mother of the victim girl. She has supported the fact that when her daughter Farzana Khatoon returned to her house in the night she told her about the incident of rape committed by accused appellant Chhotu. She has further stated that her daughter told her that the rape was committed by accused appellant in dilapidated house situated near her house. 9. This fact has been fully corroborated by P.W.1 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.2 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.3 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.4 vide paragraph - 2 and P.W.5 vide paragraph - 1. She has further stated that her daughter told her that the rape was committed by accused appellant in dilapidated house situated near her house. 9. This fact has been fully corroborated by P.W.1 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.2 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.3 vide paragraph - 1, P.W.4 vide paragraph - 2 and P.W.5 vide paragraph - 1. They all have stated that on hulla they came to the house of the informant where the victim girl disclosed the fact that she was ravished by the accused appellant in a dilapidated house situated nearby. 10. There is also consistent evidence on the point that as a result of rape the victim girl began to bleed from her private part. P.W.8, the mother of the victim girl, has stated in her evidence that when her daughter returned to her house she saw that she was bleeding from her private part and her garments were soacked with blood. This fact has been supported by almost all witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution. Those witnesses are P.Ws. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. They all have stated that the victim girl was bleeding from her private part and her clothes were stained with blood. It is needless to say that the victim girl (P.W. 6) has also stated in her evidence that as a result of rape she began to bleed from her private part. 11. This fact has also been supported by the 1.o. who is P.W.7 Chandeshwar Prasad Singh. The informant Rehana Khatoon brought the victim girl before the police P.W.7 in the same night. He has stated in his evidence that the informant produced before him blood stained clothes of the victim girl which were seizedd through seizure list Ext.5. In paragraph - 5 of his evidence, he has further stated that he referred the victim girl to P.M.C.H. for, medical examination through a requisition which is Ext.6.Ext.6 goes to show that on examination, he also found mark of bleeding from the private part of the victim girl. 12. There is another document to corroborate the commission of rape. The 1.o. (P.W.7) vide his examination - in - chief paragraph - 11 has stated that he sent the Exts. (blood stained clothes) to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is Exts. 2 and 2/1. 12. There is another document to corroborate the commission of rape. The 1.o. (P.W.7) vide his examination - in - chief paragraph - 11 has stated that he sent the Exts. (blood stained clothes) to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is Exts. 2 and 2/1. The report goes to show that the expert examined Salwar, Kachhi and Shameez seized by the 1.O.said to be of the victim girl marked as A, B and C and found blood as well as semen on the seized clothes. 13. Thus, to some up, it is quite evident that there is overwhelming material on the record to show that the rape was committed upon the prosecutrix Farzana Khatoon by the accused appellant. Tile prosecutrix though a child of a tender age at the time of the alleged crime has been able to narrate in a very consistent manner how she was ravished by the accused appellant. The fact that she narrated about the occurrence immediately just after without any loss of time to her mother and other witnesses is a strong piece of evidence to prove the case. I find no mate meterial discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses including the prosecutrix and her mother which go to the root of the matter or which shake the basic version of the prosecution story. 14. Now the only important question to be answered is as to whether non - examination of doctor is fatal for the prosecution or not. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is no gain to the deference. It is because there is overwhelming material on the record to show commission of rape. The fact that the prosecutrix was found bleeding from her private part, the fact that the police forwarded the victim to P.M.C.H. for medical examination as she was bleeding from her vagina and the fact that human blood and semen were found by the Forensic Science Laboratory on under garments of the victim are sufficient for prove commission of rape. Under the above circumstances, non - examination of doctor is of no consequence. 15. It is true that in a case of rape doctor is an important witness but only to corroborate the allegation of rape. Under the above circumstances, non - examination of doctor is of no consequence. 15. It is true that in a case of rape doctor is an important witness but only to corroborate the allegation of rape. If there is sufficient other material on record to corroborate the version of the prosecutrix and the testimony of prosecutrix is found to be reliable then there is no legal compulsion for the court to look corroboration from medical evidence. The above fact gains support from a decision of apex court reported in 1983 Supreme Court 911 (Sheikh Zakir Vs. State of Bihar). 16. Thus on consideration of entire evidence and circumstances, I find no occasion for interference in the finding of guilt recorded by the court below. However, it is submitted on behalf of the accused appellant that he has already suffered imprisonment for more than eight years and hence, the sentence should be reduced accordingly. 17. This case falls under Clause (f) of section 376(2) of the Code in which the minimum punishment is 10 years R.1. apart from fine. The court below has awarded minimum punishment of imprisonment and has not awarded any fine which ought to have been awarded. Considering the nature of the crime and age of the prosecutrix, I find no special reason or mitigating circumstances to show any leniency to the accused appellant. Rape is not a crime only against the victim but also against entire society. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere in the quantum of sentence awarded by the court below. 18. In the result, this appeal is dismissed.