Read the full judgment text of CACC 000356/1973 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The 1st appellant was charged with, in the first instance, two charges of forgery and two of uttering. As the fruit of those four charges, there was a fifth charge of obtaining property by deception. The 2nd appellant also faced that fifth charge and the property obtained was, in fact, money to the tune of some sixty-five thousand odd dollars. The sixth to the tenth charges follow a precisely similar pattern, the 1st appellant being charged with two offences of forgery and two of uttering and