consumers from three centers in Mananthavady section, ie., Mananthavady, Panamaram and vellamande and that the same consumer numbers are in existence in the three centers and that the prosecution has not adduced any positive evidence to establish that the invoices involved in the matter is specifically with respect to Mananthavady centre. It is also noted that the receipts did not contain the dates, on which the payments are made. Further, the consumers when examined have not stated that it is the accused who collected the amount. It is also noted that the dates of the receipts are not mentioned in some of them and further, it is found that with respect to certain receipts wherein the dates are mentioned, the accused was on leave on the particular dates. Further there was no signature on the receipts and the writings were not established to be that of the accused in the impugned receipts. The facts vide Ext P42 report is that no definite conclusion as to the identity of the hand writing can be had. It was in the above circumstances that the Special Judge has found that the accused is entitled to be acquitted. In the circumstances noted above and considering the constraint of the Appellate Jurisdiction with respect to order of