1. This conviction cannot be upheld. The appellant has been convicted of criminally misappropriating a total sum of Rs. 213-5. On the facts, 26 different sums amounting to Rs. 91-2 were criminally misapproprited between the 4th of August 1921, and 12th of January 1922, Rs. 2 were criminally misappropriated on the 12th of August 1921.
2. Twelve annas were criminally misappropriated on the 8th of December 1921. Eight annas were criminally misappropriated on the 23rd November, 1921 and fifteen annas were criminally misappropriated on the 18th December, 1921. There was a further shortage of Rs. 118 between the 12th and 23rd August, 1921.
3. The procedure was in contravention of the law. The error was the error which occurred in the case of Subrahmania Ayyar v. King-Emperor (1). The observations of their Lordships of the Privy Council???n that case would equally apply to this case. I accordingly allow the appeal set aside the conviction and sentence and direct that the appellant be set at liberty.
4. Appeal allowed.