State Of Karnataka vs Gangaiah on 27 June, 2008

WW”. ..,.. mnnawnlunm naun Wm; ur mxmmm men mum” or KARMMMA mm mam’ W mmmmm a~aaQz»i’«”i’E

ii

examined. The prosecutian has also not prayed

that the racaipts at zxa~P1?{a} to 917:1) a;§ $$;

the hand of tha accused. The pras¢cuticn.§§s h§f¥¢T.
referred the receipts at Exs~P1?§a) ta ?i?£fii tn u”
the handwriting Expert to fllpg@§§v §§§=i a§i§,;?

accuments contain the _:n;nd&ri£inq _5¢§ W:t§§””

raspandantwaccusad.

4. In that view,.@’j’c:m5.Ta;-e;ek&=«”;:.§j”acquittal is

sauna and propar..Appaaiwfiianigsgfifi;a”*”

:9′