JUDGMENTBY: THOMSON CJ

delivering the judgment of the Court: This appellant was convicted in the High Court at Ipoh on 28th October, 1958, for four offences of criminal breach of trust in contravention of section 408 of the Penal Code end three offences of falsification of accounts in contravention of section 477A. He was sentenced to terms of imprisonment amounting in all to four years. He has now appealed against his convictions and his sentences.

The only ground of appeal that has been argued before us is that the charges against the appellant were joined and tried together in contravention of the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and that therefore by reason of the effect attributed to these provisions in the well known case of Subramania Ayyar v King-Emperor 28 IA 257 PC the convictions should be set aside.

On the view we have formed as to the question actually involved in the appeal and before considering the actual charges on which the appellant was tried it is desirable to consider the nature of the prosecution case.

Towards the end of 1957 it was discovered that in the books of the Hongkong and Shanghai Bank at Ipoh there was a very considerable discrepancy between the total amount of credit balances shown in the current accounts ledger and the credit balance in the general ledger. Investigations of this discrepancy, according to the prosecution, led to the results that between about the middle of January, 1955 and the end of October, 1956, sums amounting in all to at least $ 60,000 had been stolen. The thefts had been concealed by a series of ingenious operations in connection with the current amount with the Bank of the General Omnibus Company.

Briefly the alleged nature of these operations was as follows. When the company paid money into the Bank it was accompanied by a paying in slip made out in duplicate. In accordance with the usual practice of the Bank the money was checked with the paying in slip by the receiving shroff or cashier who then passed both copies of the paying in slip to a senior officer of the Bank who checked the copies with each other but not with the cash. One copy was then returned to the customer and the other copy was retained in the Bank for the purpose of posting the customers account in the current accounts ledger. In the case of the present proceeds, however, before it could be posted it was removed and there was substituted for it a forged slip showing a very much smaller amount than that originally shown. The effect of this was that when at the end of the day the shroff had to account for the cash in his possession he was able to account for an amount which was less than he had in fact received by the difference between the amount of the genuine paying in slip and that of the forged one. The true state of affairs was kept for the time being from the notice of the customer by the substitution of fabricated monthly statements for the genuine ones prepared from the current accounts ledger and, again for the time being, was concealed from the higher officers of the Bank in the later stages by the suppression of cheques drawn by the customer and presented for clearance by other Banks.

It was the case for the prosecution that the operation relating to the falsification of the paying in slips was conducted on 11 occasions between 17th January, 1955 and 19th September, 1955, the total amounts involved being$ 45,000, that it was again conducted on 18th August, 1956 in respect of$ 5,000, on 3rd September, 1956, in respect of $ 5,000 and on 29th October, 1956, in respect of $ 5,000 and that on each occasion the shroff involved was the appellant. On each of these occasions the money paid in by the Company was received by the appellant who at all material times was employed by the Bank as a shroff and on each of these occasions the paying in slips were falsified by the appellant. On that and on the ultimate shortage in the Banks funds it was said that the inference was clear and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document