CO129-409 - Governor Sir May - 1914 [1-3] — Page 186

î

!

i

V..

that Alim Khan was receiving fees in advance is denied by these officers, and it is altogether negatived, firstly by the very

*and 185 definitely worded circular of the 14th. November, 1912, secondly by the action of the Registrar in taking immediate criminal proceedings in the Folice Court as soon as he found that

Alim Khan the fees had been so received and had been retained. accounts for the Circular as follows:- He was frequently asked by members of the public to receive fees and, in order to protect himself, he asked the Registrar to draw up an order prohibiting clerks from receiving fees, which order he could, when necessary, produce to the public. This explanation is denied by ur. Nisbet and by myself, and I have explained above in what circunstances the

Circular was issued.

9.

-

-

but

I am satisfied that Alim Khan was well aware, especially after his interview with me, that he had no right to receive and retain money, which it was intended to apply in pay- -ment of fees, and I am satisfied that he was well aware that his superior officers did not know that he was doing so. It is probabl that he did not definitely intend fraudulently to convert the money to his own use the risk of detection was too great owing to his financial straits he had urgent need of the money, ami I am of the opinion that he deliberately delayed the rants Letters of Administration because he could not afford to disbure the sums required for fees. It will be sufficient to quote one case in this connection. On the 17th. Septem er, 1912, I, as Deputy Registrar, passed the papers in Lei Ah Shun deceased subject to the provision of sureties in the sum of 8600, being twice the value of the estate. This was a matter of routine which it was Alim Khan's duty to keep in view. On the 23rd. December, 1912. after I had left the Registry, he drafted a minute enquiring the Land Officer whother two sur tien nuwed were valid, and

I.

terry signed it. On time following day the Land Officer replied; they were not registered as omers of property. It was then ban's duty to bring the matter to the attention of the

1

Deputy