S. K. MOHANTY, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal from jail arises out of a judgment of conviction for the offence under section 326, I. P. C. passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak in Sessions Trial No. 18/87 of 1990. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the said offence. ( 2 ) P. W. 5 the victim girl is the daughter of P. W. 6. The appellant after marrying the elder sister of P. W. 5 was living in her house as domesticated son-in-law for some time, cultivating the lands of her mother-in-law. On account of quarrel, later he lived separately with his wife. ( 3 ) THE prosecution case in brief is that P. W. 6 wanted to sell some lands to get P. W. 5 married. The appellant did not agree to the proposal and instead expressed that he would himself marry P. W. 5. P. W. 6 did not agree to such idea and after a quarrel, the appellant lived separately from P. Ws. 5 and 6. Then on 28. 7. 1990 at about II A. M. when P. W. 6 was absent from her house, the appellant called P. W. 5 and when she did not comply, he lifted her from the kitchen to another room where he made her lie on the floor and picking up a Kodala from the comer of a room attempted to assault her by means of the same. P. W. 5 however caught hold of the same and snatched it from his hand. The appellant snatched back the Kodala from the hand of P. W. 5 and then bringing a bag of rice pressed it on her body and sitting on her waist and folding both her hands by means of one of his hands gave Kodala blows by means of his other hand. As a result of such assault she sustained cut injuries on her right hand palm and left hand. P. W. 5 was then taken to Tihidi Community Health Centre where the Doctor, P. W. 10 gave some treatment and hurriedly sent the injured to the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Bhadrak. Then P. W. 5 was admitted and. treated by P. W. 7, the Orthopaedic Specialist, P. W. 5 was ultimately discharged from Bhadrak Hospital on 13. 8. 1990. P. W. 5 was then taken to Tihidi Community Health Centre where the Doctor, P. W. 10 gave some treatment and hurriedly sent the injured to the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Bhadrak. Then P. W. 5 was admitted and. treated by P. W. 7, the Orthopaedic Specialist, P. W. 5 was ultimately discharged from Bhadrak Hospital on 13. 8. 1990. ( 4 ) THE appellant denied to have committed the crime alleged against him. He on the other hand contended that the fingers of P. W. 5 were lost from her childhood and out of grudge, a false case had been foisted against him. ( 5 ) AT the trial as many as 10 witnesses were examined by the prosecution including aforesaid P. Ws. 5, 6, 7 and 10. P. Ws. 1 to 4 are post-occurrence witnesses. P. W. 5 lodged the written report, Ext. 3 before the Officer in-charge, Tihidi Police Station on the same day at about 1. 25 P. M. and on his direction P. W. 8, the A. S. I. drew up the formal FJ. R. Ext. 3/3, investigated into the case and ultimately submitted the charge-sheet. ( 6 ) THE doctor, P. W. 7 identifying P. W. 5 in court stated, that he remained P. W. 5 on 20. 7. 1990 when he found Joss of little finger and ring finger of her right hand, hanging of the middle finger and index finger of her right hand through a tag of skin, incised wound from tip of right thumb and incised wound over root of all fingers. He claims to have operated and done trans carpal amputathm and repaired the right thumb with the wrist. He has mentioned in detail in the bed-head ticket Ext. 2, the treatment given to P. W. 5. His evidence reveals that P. W. 5 was discharged from the hospital on 13. 8. 1990. He has specifically stated that the injuries found on P. W. 5 were grievous in nature and were bleeding at the time of examination. According to him, the injuries were possible by the sharp side of Kodala. He has denied the suggestion that he has not examined P. W. 5 at all. In examination-in-chief he claimed to have examined Swaranalata Das daughter of Dhaneswar Das in accordance with the requisition sent to him. But P. W. 5 bears the name Sakuntala Das daughter of Dhaneswar Das. He has denied the suggestion that he has not examined P. W. 5 at all. In examination-in-chief he claimed to have examined Swaranalata Das daughter of Dhaneswar Das in accordance with the requisition sent to him. But P. W. 5 bears the name Sakuntala Das daughter of Dhaneswar Das. The doctor, P. W. 7 however specifically identified P. W. 5 in court and claimed to have examined her on that occasion. On a perusal of the record it is found that in original police requisition sent by Officer In-charge, Tihidi Police Station, the name of the injured is stated to be Swarnalata alias Sakuntala. In the bed-head ticket of the Bhadrak Hospital, her name has been stated as Swarnalata Das only. Considering all these materials, there cannot be any doubt that in fact P. W. 10 examined the victim girl in the Tihidi P. H. Cand P. W. 7 then examine her at Bhadrak hospital. Considering all these evidence along with the evidence of the injured P. W. 5, there can be no doubt that P. W. 5 sustained the injuries noticed by the doctors on 20. 7. 1990. ( 7 ) THE evidence of the victim girl P. W. 5 fully corroborates the prosecution story as stated above. Besides medical evidence, the testimony of P. W. 5 also stands corroborated by other evidence which are briefly referred to hereunder. From the evidence of P. Ws. 1, 2 and 4, it reveals that they reached the spot soon after the occurrence and found a blood-stained Kodala, a blood-stained palm-leaf Asana and some cut human fingers and blood-stains on the walls of the room in the house of P. W. 6. P. W. 2 has added that when he rushed to the spot, he found the appellant fleeing away from the house of P. W. 6. P. W. 9 claims that he immediately came to the spot and found P. W. 5 lying in the room and there was a pool of blood at that place. There is some discrepancy in the evidence of these witnesses as to how many fingers were found lying inside the room. Thus, according to P. Ws. 1, 2 and 4 there were two separated fingers inside the room whereas P. W. 9 has stated that he found four of the fingers of P. W. 5 were cut and lying in the pool of blood. Thus, according to P. Ws. 1, 2 and 4 there were two separated fingers inside the room whereas P. W. 9 has stated that he found four of the fingers of P. W. 5 were cut and lying in the pool of blood. It is very well proved from the evidence of P. W. 5 and the doctor that two of her fingers had been severed. Consequently, the minor discrepancy in evidence cannot affect the prosecution. The Investigating Officer, P. W. 8 seized blood-stained palm-leaf Asana from the spot as per the seizure list. Ext. 1. ( 8 ) ON careful consideration of the above materials on record, I am of the view that the impugned order of conviction is unassailable. The sentence imposed in this case cannot be said to be either high or excessive. In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. Appeal dismissed, .