Page:Hyderabad in 1890 and 1891; comprising all the letters on Hyderabad affairs written to the Madras Hindu by its Hyderabad correspondent during 1890 and 1891 (IA hyderabadin1890100bangrich).pdf/30

Page 22 charge of the office of Deputy Accountant General, he had to give up even signing cheques "blind-folded." In the light of all these facts, the portion of Afsul Husain's judgment I have been concerned with, furnishes the clearest possible case not only of suppressio veri but of suggestio jalsi. No respectable member of the Bar bound to defend his client would stoop to such subterfuges-but the senior puisno judge of the Adawlut-ai- atiya is a privileged person! It is stated in the judgment: "He (Mr. Gya Persad) further admitted that such an innovation (as is suggested in his memo.) could not have been brought into force without the sanction of Government, and that such sanction was not obtained." What Mr. Gya Persad actually admitted was that if the Accountant General's Office were a well-regulated office to innovation in the "practices" of it could be introduced without the sanction of the Government. I leave you to see how far this accords with the admission ascribed to Mr. Gya Persad by the Judge. I may remark in passing that the Accountant General's office is one of the worst managed offices in the State-not one man therein has his duties defined but de- pends for work solely on the discretion of the Accountant General. The judgment has it that "when Jaya Rao had to sign cheques he, either through misconception, or wilfully, also made it (the Accountant General's order on Mr. Gya Persad's memo.) a safeguard for himself, and leaning on it signed fictitious cheques. This is the very period during which Jaya Rao was engaged in submitting the account of the liabilities of the late Mukhtar-nl-mulk. At this time on account of intrigues in which both of them were engaged, Jaya Rao liad become exceedingly bold. The link of these intrigues is in existence still." A tissue of statements more characterised by untruth and rancour, I have not come across. The first fictitious cheque, as shown in the statement given in the judgment became complete order for payment on the 21st Farwardi 1207 F, while the Salar Jung liability accounts had been settled long before that time, about Amerdad or Sharawar 1296 F. Yet the period of the issue of the fictitious cheques is said by Mr. Afsal