The appellants in this case appealed against both conviction and sentence. The first appellant contended that the respondent failed to prove charges of fraudulent false accounting beyond reasonable doubt, and that the sentence in both counts were illegal.
The second appellant argued that the first appellant judge erred when he dismissed the appeal and that he erred when he upheld the convictions without evidence to prove the charges.
From the evidence that was adduced, it was found that the key witnesses in the prosecution case failed to explain deficiencies in auditing, which error seriously affected the credibility of the witnesses, and which errors were not considered by the court. Therefore, the conviction was found to have been based on arithmetical errors which could not be a substitute for evidence to prove the charges against the appellants.