The first case involved the misappropriation of bank loans, as the same person who had filled in the loan vouchers had also signed for and received the money. The writing in Hindi on the vouchers was compared with specimen handwriting from the suspected person. It showed rhythm and fluency in the formation of strokes, and the presence of features common to both sets of writing showed that they had been executed by the same person. The endorsement, however, was written with heavy pen pressure with a different alignment; the movements of the strokes appeared uncertain, and the rhythm and slant of the writing was disturbed. Although the endorsement signatures appeared abnormal, they showed some similarities with the writing on the body of the vouchers. Critical examination of the four vouchers showed an essential resemblance in the formation of certain letters and words, suggesting that whereas the body writings were written with the normal hand, the endorsements were executed with the unaccustomed hand by the same person. In another case, the allegation was that money had been fraudulently withdrawn in a sub-post office by forgery of the signatures of the account holder. The writing on the warrant for payment exhibited the general qualities of the writing of a skilled writer, but the writing on the receipt for payment and the application for withdrawal appeared at first to be that of an unskilled writer; however, closer examination showed that there were similarities between the writing on the warrant of payment and the receipt, including the relative size of the letters and their proportion in the words, along with other common qualities in the formation of particular letters. 2 illustrative photos and 6 references