Can the accused contest the special tribunal’s validity and the fine calculation in an appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court?

Sources
Source Judgment: Read judgment
Case Analysis: Read case analysis

Suppose a person who runs a small construction business submits a series of invoices to a state‑run public works department, claiming reimbursement for the supply of cement, steel rods and labor for projects that were never actually executed, and the department, relying on the invoices, releases payments amounting to several lakhs of rupees.

The investigating agency files a First Information Report alleging cheating under the Indian Penal Code, asserting that the accused deliberately made false representations to induce the department to part with public money. Ten separate FIRs are lodged, each corresponding to a distinct invoice, and the accused is charged with ten counts of cheating. The special tribunal constituted under a wartime ordinance conducts the trial, convicts the accused on all ten counts, and imposes a cumulative compulsory fine calculated on the total sum claimed in the invoices.

During the trial, the accused seeks to produce documentary evidence and to examine witnesses located in a neighbouring country and in a foreign jurisdiction who could attest that the alleged works were never performed. The tribunal refuses to permit the examination of the foreign witnesses, and the accused is unable to introduce the documentary proof because the tribunal rules that the documents are “public records” and therefore inadmissible under the Evidence Act. The accused also contends that the special tribunal was improperly constituted after the expiry of the ordinance that created it, and that the fine should be limited to the amount actually paid, not the inflated total claimed.

After the conviction, the accused files a petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the validity of the tribunal, the admissibility of the evidence, the multiplicity of the charges, and the quantum of the fine. The petition argues that each invoice does not constitute a separate false representation but rather a single scheme of cheating, that the tribunal’s composition violated statutory requirements, and that the fine should be reduced to reflect the actual disbursement. The prosecution, meanwhile, maintains that each invoice represents an independent deception, that the tribunal was validly constituted, and that the fine must be based on the total amount fraudulently obtained.

The legal problem that emerges is whether the accused can obtain relief by merely presenting a factual defence at the trial stage, or whether a higher‑court remedy is required to address the procedural and substantive defects identified. A factual defence—such as denying knowledge of falsity or disputing the existence of the works—does not cure the alleged irregularities in the tribunal’s constitution, the improper exclusion of defence witnesses, or the miscalculation of the compulsory fine. Moreover, the multiplicity of charges raises a question of whether the convictions should be merged, a matter that can only be resolved through a higher judicial review.

Because the convictions and fine were imposed by a tribunal whose statutory foundation is now contested, the appropriate remedy is a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. An appeal under the Code of Criminal Procedure allows the accused to challenge the legality of the tribunal, the admissibility of evidence, the validity of the multiple charges, and the quantum of the fine. The High Court has jurisdiction to entertain such an appeal, examine the statutory validity of the tribunal, and order a re‑assessment of the fine in accordance with the actual amount paid.

In preparing the appeal, the accused engages a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court who drafts a petition outlining the procedural infirmities, the evidentiary exclusions, and the misapplication of the fine. The petition cites precedents on the constitution of special tribunals, the test for multiplicity of offences, and the principles governing compulsory fines under the IPC. It also requests that the High Court set aside the convictions on the grounds of improper jurisdiction and direct a re‑trial before a regular court, or alternatively, quash the convictions and remit the matter for a fresh trial.

The High Court, upon receiving the appeal, will first examine whether the tribunal was validly constituted under the relevant ordinance and subsequent legislative amendments. If the court finds that the tribunal’s composition violated statutory provisions, the convictions may be declared void ab initio. Next, the court will assess the admissibility of the documents and the exclusion of foreign witnesses, applying the provisions of the Evidence Act concerning public documents and the right to a fair defence. Finally, the court will consider the issue of multiplicity, determining whether the ten invoices constitute separate false representations or a single scheme, which will affect the number of convictions that can stand.

If the High Court concludes that the fine was calculated on an erroneous basis, it has the power to modify the compulsory fine to reflect only the amount actually disbursed, in line with the principle that fines should correspond to the loss suffered by the victim. The court may also order the prosecution to pay costs incurred by the accused in pursuing the appeal, acknowledging the procedural irregularities that necessitated the higher‑court intervention.

The remedy of filing a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court therefore addresses the core legal problem: it provides a forum to correct procedural defects, to reassess evidentiary rulings, and to ensure that the punishment imposed is proportionate to the proven loss. An ordinary factual defence at the trial level would not have the authority to overturn the tribunal’s orders or to adjust the fine, making the appellate route essential for achieving substantive justice.

In this scenario, the accused’s strategic choice to pursue a criminal appeal, rather than a simple bail application or a petition for revision, aligns with the procedural posture identified in the original analysis. The appeal enables a comprehensive review of both the substantive charge of cheating and the ancillary issues of jurisdiction, evidence, and penalty, all of which fall within the High Court’s jurisdiction under the Criminal Procedure Code.

Thus, the fictional case mirrors the legal contours of the analyzed judgment—multiple cheating charges, a special tribunal, evidentiary disputes, and a contested fine—while presenting a fresh factual backdrop. The appropriate procedural solution is a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, a remedy that allows the accused to challenge the convictions, seek a reduction of the fine, and obtain a fair determination of liability.

Question: Was the special tribunal that tried the accused validly constituted despite the alleged expiry of the ordinance that created it, and what are the consequences if it is found to be invalid?

Answer: The factual matrix shows that the investigating agency lodged ten FIRs and the special tribunal, created under a wartime ordinance, proceeded to try the accused on each count of cheating. The accused contends that the ordinance had ceased to operate after its prescribed period and that subsequent legislative measures did not lawfully continue the tribunal. The legal issue therefore turns on whether the tribunal retained jurisdiction after the expiry of its founding instrument. Jurisprudence holds that a tribunal established by a temporary ordinance may continue to function if a later statute expressly validates its existence or if emergency legislation suspends the limitation period. In the present scenario, the prosecution points to a later amendment that purported to extend the tribunal’s life and to a statutory provision that altered its composition. If the High Court determines that the continuation was not supported by clear legislative authority, the tribunal would be deemed to have acted without jurisdiction. Such a finding would render all its orders void ab initio, meaning the convictions and the imposed fine would be set aside. The accused would be entitled to a declaration of nullity and could seek a fresh trial before a regular court. Conversely, if the court finds that the legislative steps satisfied the requirement of a valid continuation, the tribunal’s orders would stand, and the appeal would be limited to other grounds. The practical implication for the accused is that the validity of the tribunal is a threshold issue; an adverse finding would provide a complete reset of the criminal proceedings. The prosecution, on the other hand, would lose the benefit of the tribunal’s determinations and would have to re‑establish its case. In preparing the appeal, the accused has engaged a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court who emphasizes the procedural defect and argues that the lack of statutory backing defeats the tribunal’s jurisdiction, thereby justifying the quashing of the convictions.

Question: Did the tribunal’s refusal to admit the foreign witnesses and to admit the documentary evidence as public records infringe the accused’s right to a fair defence, and how might the High Court address such evidentiary exclusions?

Answer: The trial record reveals that the accused attempted to call witnesses residing in a neighbouring country and in a foreign jurisdiction, asserting that their testimony would prove that the alleged works were never performed. The tribunal rejected the request, citing procedural constraints, and also ruled that the invoices and related correspondence were public records, thereby excluding them under the Evidence Act. The legal problem centers on whether these exclusions violated the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial and the principles of natural justice. A fair defence requires that the accused be given a reasonable opportunity to present material that could affect the outcome. Denial of foreign testimony may be justified if the court finds that the evidence is irrelevant or that the witnesses are unavailable, but the accused must be afforded an alternative means of proof, such as documentary affidavits. The classification of the invoices as public records is also contestable; public documents are admissible only when they are official records of a government body, not private business invoices. If the High Court finds that the tribunal erred in its evidentiary rulings, it can set aside the convictions on the ground of procedural unfairness and order a re‑trial. The court may also direct that the foreign witnesses be examined through video link or that their statements be recorded abroad, ensuring that the accused’s defence is not crippled. The prosecution would be required to revisit its evidentiary strategy, possibly presenting additional corroborative material. The accused, represented by lawyers in Chandigarh High Court, argues that the exclusion of crucial defence evidence undermines the reliability of the verdict and that the High Court has the power to rectify the defect by either admitting the evidence or ordering a fresh hearing where the evidence can be properly considered.

Question: Are the ten invoices submitted by the accused to the public works department to be treated as ten separate false representations or as a single scheme of cheating, and what impact does this determination have on the multiplicity of convictions?

Answer: The factual scenario presents ten distinct invoices, each claiming payment for supplies or labour that were never delivered. The prosecution maintains that each invoice constitutes an independent deception, thereby justifying ten separate charges. The defence, however, argues that the invoices were part of a single plan to defraud the department, and that the law discourages multiple convictions for the same continuous transaction. The legal test for multiplicity examines whether each representation was made at a different time, involved a different victim, or related to a distinct transaction. In this case, the invoices were addressed to the same department, but each listed different quantities and dates, suggesting separate transactions. If the High Court concludes that each invoice represents a distinct false representation, the multiple convictions will be upheld, and the cumulative penalty will stand. If, alternatively, the court finds that the conduct amounts to a single scheme, it may merge the charges, reducing the number of convictions to one and adjusting the fine accordingly. This determination also influences the quantum of the compulsory fine, as the fine may be calculated on the total amount obtained rather than on each invoice individually. The practical implication for the accused is that a finding of multiplicity increases the severity of the punishment and the stigma of multiple convictions. For the prosecution, it reinforces the seriousness of the alleged fraud. The accused’s counsel, a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court, emphasizes that the factual continuity of the scheme should preclude multiplicity, urging the court to apply the principle that the law seeks to avoid excessive punishment for a single course of conduct.

Question: Can the compulsory fine imposed on the accused be reduced to reflect only the amount actually paid by the department, and what legal principles guide the High Court in modifying such a fine?

Answer: The tribunal imposed a cumulative compulsory fine calculated on the total sum claimed in the ten invoices, even though the department disbursed only a portion of that amount. The accused argues that the fine should correspond to the actual loss suffered, citing the principle that penalties must be proportionate to the proven damage. The legal issue is whether the court can adjust the fine on the basis of the amount actually paid, rather than the inflated claim. Jurisprudence holds that compulsory fines in cheating cases are meant to compensate the victim and deter future misconduct; therefore, they should not exceed the loss incurred. If the High Court accepts that the fine was calculated on an erroneous basis, it has the authority to modify the quantum, either by reducing it to the amount actually transferred or by ordering a recalculation that reflects the net loss after accounting for any restitution. The court will also consider whether the fine is punitive or compensatory, and whether the excess amount would be punitive beyond the statutory ceiling. A reduction of the fine would alleviate the financial burden on the accused and ensure that the punishment aligns with the proven facts. The prosecution, however, may contend that the fine serves a deterrent purpose and that the inflated claim represents the full scope of the fraudulent intent. The accused, represented by lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court, submits that the fine should be calibrated to the actual disbursement, arguing that any excess violates the principle of proportionality and the right to be sentenced within the limits of the proven offence. The High Court’s decision on this matter will have a direct impact on the final relief granted to the accused and will set a precedent for how compulsory fines are assessed in similar cheating cases.

Question: Why does the challenge to the special tribunal’s constitution and the quantum of the compulsory fine have to be pursued before the Punjab and Haryana High Court rather than before a subordinate court or a revisionary forum?

Answer: The factual matrix shows that the accused was convicted by a special tribunal created under a wartime ordinance that has since been contested for its continued validity. Under the hierarchy of criminal adjudication, a tribunal that exercises original jurisdiction over offences such as cheating is a statutory substitute for a regular court of session. When the tribunal’s statutory foundation is questioned, the appropriate remedy is an appeal under the criminal appellate procedure, which is vested exclusively in the High Court of the state whose jurisdiction the tribunal exercised. The Punjab and Haryana High Court possesses the authority to examine the legislative competence of the ordinance, to scrutinise whether the subsequent amendments that altered the tribunal’s composition complied with the constitutional requirement of a duly constituted adjudicatory body, and to assess whether the fine imposed exceeds the loss actually suffered. A subordinate court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain a direct challenge to the tribunal’s constitution because it can only entertain revisions on the basis of a final order that is already within its own appellate jurisdiction. Moreover, the High Court is empowered to entertain a criminal appeal that can address both substantive and procedural defects, including the multiplicity of charges and the calculation of the fine, which are matters of law and fact that require a comprehensive judicial review. By filing the appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the accused ensures that the court with the requisite jurisdiction can set aside the convictions if the tribunal is found void, or can remit the matter for a fresh trial before a regular court. The presence of a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court is essential to navigate the procedural requisites, draft a petition that complies with the High Court Rules, and argue the jurisdictional points that a lower forum cannot entertain. This strategic choice reflects the necessity of invoking the correct appellate forum to obtain a meaningful remedy beyond the limited scope of a factual defence at the tribunal level.

Question: How does filing a criminal appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court overcome the limitations of a purely factual defence that was unavailable at the tribunal stage?

Answer: At the tribunal, the accused attempted to rely on a factual defence by denying knowledge of the falsity of the invoices and by seeking to produce documentary proof and foreign witnesses. The tribunal’s refusal to admit the documents on the ground that they were public records and its denial of foreign witness testimony illustrate procedural barriers that a factual defence could not surmount because the tribunal’s evidentiary rulings are final on the record. A criminal appeal, however, is not a re‑litigation of the facts but a review of the legality of the tribunal’s decisions, the admissibility standards applied, and the procedural fairness accorded. The High Court can examine whether the tribunal correctly interpreted the provisions of the Evidence Act concerning public documents, whether it erred in refusing to consider testimony that could have materially affected the outcome, and whether the multiplicity of charges violated the principle against splitting a single scheme of cheating into multiple offences. By raising these points on appeal, the accused shifts the focus from merely proving innocence to demonstrating that the tribunal acted beyond its jurisdiction or misapplied legal principles, which can lead to the setting aside of the convictions or a remand for fresh proceedings. Additionally, the High Court can entertain a petition for quashing the fine if it finds that the calculation was based on an inflated claim rather than the actual disbursement. This appellate route thus provides a procedural avenue to correct errors that a factual defence alone cannot remedy, ensuring that the accused’s right to a fair trial is vindicated. Engaging lawyers in Chandigarh High Court becomes relevant when the accused seeks to file ancillary applications, such as a stay of execution or a bail application, that may be processed through the High Court’s registry in Chandigarh, thereby complementing the primary appeal strategy.

Question: What procedural steps must the accused follow in preparing and filing the criminal appeal, and why might the accused seek a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court to assist with service and jurisdictional compliance?

Answer: The procedural roadmap begins with the preparation of a comprehensive appeal petition that sets out the factual background, identifies the specific errors of law and procedure committed by the tribunal, and articulates the relief sought, such as quashing of the convictions, reduction of the fine, or a direction for a retrial before a regular court. The petition must be filed within the period prescribed by the criminal appellate rules, typically thirty days from the receipt of the tribunal’s order, unless a condonation of delay is obtained. The accused must annex the original FIRs, the tribunal’s judgment, the evidence that was excluded, and any affidavits supporting the claim of procedural irregularity. After filing, the petition is served on the prosecution, which may be the state’s public prosecutor, and on the investigating agency. Because the Punjab and Haryana High Court has its principal registry in Chandigarh, service of notice and filing of subsequent motions often require interaction with the Chandigarh registry. A lawyer in Chandigarh High Court can ensure that the service is effected in accordance with the High Court Rules, that the petition is entered in the correct cause list, and that any interlocutory applications, such as a stay of execution of the fine, are properly presented. Moreover, the lawyer can liaise with the court clerk to verify that the appeal is allocated to the appropriate bench, whether a criminal or a constitutional bench, depending on the issues raised. The lawyer can also advise on the preparation of a supporting affidavit that details the alleged invalidity of the tribunal’s composition, drawing upon precedent and statutory interpretation. By securing the assistance of a lawyer in Chandigarh High Court, the accused mitigates the risk of procedural missteps that could lead to dismissal of the appeal, thereby preserving the opportunity to have the High Court examine the substantive and procedural defects identified.

Question: Under what circumstances can the Punjab and Haryana High Court modify or quash the compulsory fine, and how does the involvement of lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court shape the strategy for presenting evidence on the actual amount paid?

Answer: The High Court may intervene to modify or set aside the compulsory fine when it finds that the tribunal’s calculation was based on an erroneous premise, such as using the total amount claimed in the invoices rather than the actual sum disbursed by the public works department. The court examines the principle that a compulsory fine must correspond to the loss suffered by the victim, and it can order a recalibration of the fine to reflect the true quantum of money that left the public coffers. To succeed, the accused must produce credible documentary evidence, such as bank statements, payment vouchers, and audited accounts of the department, demonstrating the exact amount transferred. Because the tribunal previously ruled that such documents were inadmissible as public records, the appeal must argue that the High Court has the authority to re‑evaluate the admissibility standard, especially where the exclusion resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Lawyers in Punjab and Haryana High Court play a pivotal role in framing this argument, drafting detailed annexures, and filing motions to admit the financial records as evidence. They can also request the court to issue a commission for the production of documents from the department, ensuring that the evidence is authenticated and admissible. Additionally, the lawyers can prepare a comparative analysis of the fine imposed in similar cases, highlighting the disparity and supporting the request for reduction. If the High Court is persuaded that the fine was punitive rather than compensatory, it may quash the fine altogether or order a refund of any excess amount already paid. The strategic involvement of experienced counsel ensures that procedural safeguards are observed, that the evidentiary burden is met, and that the appeal articulates a clear nexus between the actual loss and the fine, thereby enhancing the likelihood of a favorable modification.

Question: What procedural defects in the tribunal’s constitution and jurisdiction can be raised on appeal and how should a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court evaluate them?

Answer: The factual backdrop shows that the special tribunal was created under a wartime ordinance that has since expired, and that the tribunal continued to operate after legislative amendments altered its membership. The legal problem therefore centres on whether the tribunal retained lawful authority to try the accused after the expiry of the founding ordinance. A lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court must first obtain the original ordinance, the subsequent amendment orders and any statutory provisions that extended the tribunal’s existence. The examination should focus on the principle that a body created by a temporary law ceases to exist when the law lapses unless a valid saving clause or a successor statute preserves its jurisdiction. If the tribunal was not validly constituted at the time of the trial, every order it passed, including the conviction and fine, is vulnerable to being set aside as a nullity. The procedural consequence of establishing this defect is that the High Court can declare the tribunal void ab initio, thereby vacating the convictions and directing a fresh trial before a regular court of competent jurisdiction. Practically, this strategy protects the accused from the stigma of a conviction that rests on an unlawful forum and opens the door to a comprehensive re‑examination of the evidence. It also forces the prosecution to restart its case, which may be costly and time‑consuming, and may encourage settlement discussions. The lawyer should prepare a detailed chronology of the ordinance’s expiry, the legislative history of the amendment, and relevant case law on tribunal validity, presenting these points in a concise prayer for quashing of the tribunal’s orders. By establishing a jurisdictional defect, the appeal gains a strong ground that does not rely solely on evidentiary disputes, thereby increasing the likelihood of relief.

Question: How can the exclusion of foreign witnesses and the classification of the invoices as public documents be challenged and what evidentiary strategy should lawyers in Chandigarh High Court adopt?

Answer: The accused attempted to call witnesses residing in a neighbouring country and in a foreign jurisdiction to prove that the alleged works were never performed, and also sought to introduce invoices and related correspondence as documentary proof. The legal problem is that the tribunal ruled the invoices were public records and therefore inadmissible, and it refused to permit the foreign witnesses. The procedural consequence is that the accused was denied a full opportunity to present a factual defence, raising a violation of the right to a fair trial. Lawyers in Chandigarh High Court should begin by obtaining certified copies of the invoices, payment vouchers and any internal communications that demonstrate the absence of work. They must argue that the invoices are private business documents, not official government records, and therefore fall outside the definition of public documents under the Evidence Act. To overcome the tribunal’s stance, the counsel should rely on precedent that private commercial records are admissible when they are material to the defence. Regarding the foreign witnesses, the strategy should involve filing a petition for the issuance of letters of request under the relevant international cooperation treaty, demonstrating that the witnesses possess unique knowledge that cannot be obtained elsewhere. The answer should emphasize that the exclusion of such testimony undermines the reliability of the conviction, especially where the prosecution’s case rests on the existence of the works. The practical implication for the accused is that successful admission of the documents and testimony could create reasonable doubt about the falsity of the representations, potentially leading to acquittal on some counts. The counsel must also prepare an affidavit explaining the logistical challenges faced in obtaining the witnesses, and request that the High Court exercise its inherent powers to ensure that the trial is conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice. By securing admission of the evidence, the defence gains a substantive factual basis to contest the cheating allegations.

Question: In what way does the multiplicity of charges affect the quantum of conviction and fine and what arguments can be made to seek merger or reduction before the High Court

Answer: The prosecution has framed ten separate charges, each linked to an individual invoice, while the defence contends that all invoices form a single scheme of cheating. The legal problem therefore revolves around whether the offences constitute distinct false representations or a single continuous deception. The procedural consequence of treating the charges as multiplicity is that the accused faces ten convictions and a cumulative fine calculated on the total amount claimed, which far exceeds the actual disbursement. The practical implication is an inflated punitive burden that may be disproportionate to the loss suffered by the public works department. To argue for merger, the defence should present the chronological sequence of the invoices, showing that they were submitted as a batch, that the alleged misrepresentations were part of one fraudulent plan, and that the victim suffered a single loss. The argument can be bolstered by citing judicial pronouncements that where the same act gives rise to multiple representations, the court may merge the offences to avoid double punishment. Conversely, if the High Court finds the charges distinct, the defence can still seek reduction of the fine by demonstrating that the statutory purpose of a compulsory fine is to compensate the victim for actual loss, not to penalise the accused for the inflated claim. The counsel should request that the fine be recalculated on the basis of the amount actually paid, which is a matter of fact that can be proved through bank statements and payment vouchers. By focusing on the principle of proportionality and the need to avoid multiplicity of punishment, the defence aims to either collapse the ten convictions into a single one or, at a minimum, to lower the monetary penalty to reflect the real loss.

Question: What are the risks associated with the accused remaining in custody during the appeal and how can bail or interim relief be secured by a lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court

Answer: After conviction the accused is likely to be detained pending the filing of the appeal, exposing him to the hardship of continued incarceration and the stigma of a criminal record. The legal problem is that the appeal raises substantial questions of jurisdiction, evidentiary exclusion and excessive fine, which, if successful, could overturn the conviction. The procedural consequence is that the accused may be entitled to bail pending the determination of these substantial issues. A lawyer in Punjab and Haryana High Court should file an application for bail on the grounds that the appeal is not merely a collateral attack but a direct challenge to the validity of the conviction. The counsel must highlight that the accused has no prior criminal record, that the alleged offence is non‑violent, and that the accused is willing to furnish sureties. Moreover, the application should emphasize that the High Court possesses the power to grant interim relief to prevent undue hardship, especially where the accused’s liberty is not required for the enforcement of the fine. The practical implication of obtaining bail is that the accused can continue to assist his legal team in gathering foreign witness statements and documentary evidence, thereby strengthening the appeal. The lawyer should also request a stay on the execution of the fine until the appeal is decided, arguing that the fine is based on a disputed quantum and that enforcing it now would cause irreversible prejudice. By securing bail and a stay, the defence preserves the accused’s freedom to actively participate in the appellate process and mitigates the risk of irreversible loss of liberty.

Question: How should the fine be recalculated to reflect actual disbursement and what precedent or principle can be invoked to persuade the High Court to modify the compulsory fine

Answer: The tribunal imposed a cumulative fine based on the total amount claimed in the ten invoices, whereas the public works department actually released only a fraction of that sum. The legal problem is that the statutory purpose of a compulsory fine is to compensate the victim for the loss suffered, not to punish beyond the actual damage. The procedural consequence is that the fine, as currently calculated, is excessive and violates the principle of proportionality. To persuade the High Court, the defence should invoke the well‑established principle that fines must be commensurate with the loss incurred and should be limited to the amount actually paid. The counsel can cite case law where courts have reduced fines on the basis that the plaintiff’s loss was less than the amount claimed by the defendant. The factual context requires the production of bank statements, payment vouchers and departmental release orders that demonstrate the exact quantum of money transferred. By presenting this evidence, the defence can argue that the fine should be limited to the sum actually disbursed, which is the only amount that caused a loss to the public treasury. The practical implication of a reduced fine is that the accused’s financial liability will be proportionate to the proven loss, and it may also influence the court’s view on the overall severity of the offence, potentially leading to a more favorable outcome on the conviction itself. The lawyer should therefore request that the High Court exercise its discretion to modify the compulsory fine, aligning it with the actual disbursement and ensuring that the punishment reflects the true extent of the wrongdoing.