BEHERA, J. ( 1 ) THE appellant's wife Raibari (hereinafter referred to as the deceasedt) had gone to the residence of her father. While she was there, the appellant went and asked for some money for which there ensued a quarrel between the two. The appellant dealt several cut blows by means of an axe (M. O. 1) as a result of which the neck: portion of the deceased was completely severed from the trunk portion resulting in her death. This was the case presented by the prosecution. ( 2 ) THE appellant stood his trial being charged under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. His plea was one of denial and false implication. The suggestion of the defence was that P. W. 5. a sister of the deceased, had illicit relationship with a teacher, namely, Trilochan Sahu (P. W. 10) which had been known to the deceased for which P. Ws. 5 and 10 bad assaulted and killed the deceased. ( 3 ) TO bring home the charge, the prosecution had examined twelve witnesses. P. Ws. 2 and 5, the two sisters of the deceased and P. W. 3, the son of the appellant and the deceased, had figured as witnesses to the occurrence. The trial court has accepted their evidence and has taken into consideration the recovery of the axe (M 0. I) from the spot which had been thrown away by the appellant and the recovery of the half-pant (M. O. II) from the person of the appellant which contained human blood of AB group, the deceased having the same group of blood and had held that the charge had been established. The appellant has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. ( 4 ) APPEARING on behalf of the appellants Mr. Das has contended that the evidence of P. Ws. 2, 3 and 5 is not worthy of credence and the recoveries of articles, taken by themselves, would not substantiate the charge. The learned Additional Government Advocate has supported the order of conviction as well founded. ( 5 ) P. W. 2 was aged about 7 years when she deposed in the court. She was thus a child witness. 2, 3 and 5 is not worthy of credence and the recoveries of articles, taken by themselves, would not substantiate the charge. The learned Additional Government Advocate has supported the order of conviction as well founded. ( 5 ) P. W. 2 was aged about 7 years when she deposed in the court. She was thus a child witness. The evidence of such a witness requires very careful scrutiny before its acceptance as a child witness at times confuses between what has been seen and what has been heard and unless her statement is immediately available, there is possibility of tutoring tile child, P. W. 3 was aged about 3 years at the time he deposed in the court. On his own showing, he had been given biscuits by his grand parents and some police people and had been asked to say that his father had killed his mother. In such state of affairs, the trial court should not have relied on the evidence of P W. 3 for any purpose. The evidence of P. W. 6 does not suffer from any infirmity. ( 6 ) BEING the sisters of the deceased, P. Ws. 2 and 5 were natural and competent witnesses to the occurrence. They are normally not supposed to rope in an innocent person and they would involve the real culprit. Both of them have testified that the appellant had dealt cut blows on the person of the deceased which severed her neck portion from the trunk portion. We have been taken through their evidence. There is no reason to discard their testimony. For the reasons recorded by the trial court, it has rightly accepted their evidence. Except a bare suggestion made to P. W. 5 that she and P. W. 10 had killed the deceased, there was no other material in support of such a plea of the defence. ( 7 ) THE evidence of P. Ws. 2 and 5 has intrinsic worth. Their evidence also finds corroboration from the recovery of M. O. I, properly identified as an axe belonging to the father of P. Ws. 2 and 5, from the spot which had been thrown away by the appellant after commission of the murder, as testified by P. Ws. 2 and 5 has intrinsic worth. Their evidence also finds corroboration from the recovery of M. O. I, properly identified as an axe belonging to the father of P. Ws. 2 and 5, from the spot which had been thrown away by the appellant after commission of the murder, as testified by P. Ws. 2 and 5 and the recovery of M. O. II from the person of the appellant when he voluntarily appeared before the Investigating Officer (P. W. 13 ). Both these articles contained human blood of AB group as found on chemical and serological tests and the blood group of the deceased was the same, as would be clear from the chemical and serological tests of the bloodstained earth seized from the scene of offence. These are telling circumstances regarding the complicity of the appellant and would amply corroborate the evidence of P. Ws. 2 and 5. ( 8 ) IN our view, there is no reason for interference. The order of conviction is well-founded. ( 9 ) THE appeal fails and is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. .