cash-only registers, day book sections and DD amendments

Cashier reports now reconcile against the drawer:
- Received/Payment exclude what cannot be cash rather than admitting
  only proven cash, so registers that pay out without recording a
  denomination breakdown are no longer silently dropped
- Closing report scoped to the cashier, with opening/closing balance,
  reversed counter transactions excluded, and cash DD receipts counted
- Day book split into Cashier and Clerk sections, filed by whose cash
  moved rather than who raised the request

Fixed one deposit or withdrawal raising two vouchers: the cashier
deposit and clerk withdrawal registers did not suppress the inner
savings command's voucher, doubling the day's cash on both reports.

Sponsor DD:
- Amendment request flow (beneficiary, payable-at branch and city)
  under maker-checker; face value and funding stay unamendable
- Cash DD denominations were collected but never saved, and the amount
  check demanded a figure notes could not add to; both fixed and the
  breakdown is now required

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

cleanup_duplicate_vouchers.sql

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+-- Removes the duplicate vouchers left behind by the double-count bug.
+--
+-- Until 2026-09-03 the cashier deposit and clerk withdrawal registers did not wrap their inner
+-- savings command in VoucherService.withOwnVoucher(...), so one counter transaction raised two
+-- vouchers over the same money: the register's own (CASHIER_DEPOSIT_REQUEST / CLERK_WITHDRAWAL_
+-- REQUEST) and a second one from the savings command (SAVINGS_TRANSACTION). The cashier's Received
+-- and Payment reports counted both, doubling the day's cash.
+--
+-- The code is fixed, so no new duplicates are created. This clears the ones already recorded.
+--
+-- WHICH ONE IS DELETED: the SAVINGS_TRANSACTION voucher. The register's voucher is the keeper --
+-- it is the one the register owns, attaches its DR/CR lines to, and stamps onto
+-- m_savings_account_transaction.voucher_no. Deleting the register's voucher instead would break
+-- that link and orphan the request row.
+--
+-- Run:  psql -h localhost -U postgres -d fineract_default -v ON_ERROR_STOP=1 -f cleanup_duplicate_vouchers.sql
+
+BEGIN;
+
+-- The duplicates: a SAVINGS_TRANSACTION voucher whose transaction is already claimed by a
+-- register voucher. Matching through savings_txn_id rather than by date or amount so that two
+-- genuinely separate transactions of the same value on the same day are never confused.
+CREATE TEMP TABLE dup_vouchers ON COMMIT DROP AS
+SELECT sav.voucher_no
+  FROM m_voucher sav
+  JOIN m_voucher reg
+    ON reg.savings_txn_id = sav.reference_id
+   AND reg.reference_type IN ('CLERK_WITHDRAWAL_REQUEST', 'CASHIER_DEPOSIT_REQUEST')
+ WHERE sav.reference_type = 'SAVINGS_TRANSACTION'
+   AND sav.voucher_type IN ('DEPOSIT', 'WITHDRAWAL');
+
+-- Refuse to run if anything else has attached itself to a voucher about to be deleted: a
+-- verification or an attachment means someone acted on that slip, and it must be looked at by hand
+-- rather than removed silently.
+DO $$
+DECLARE
+    blocked INT;
+BEGIN
+    SELECT COUNT(*) INTO blocked
+      FROM (SELECT voucher_no FROM m_voucher_verification
+             WHERE voucher_no IN (SELECT voucher_no FROM dup_vouchers)
+            UNION ALL
+            SELECT voucher_no FROM m_voucher_attachment
+             WHERE voucher_no IN (SELECT voucher_no FROM dup_vouchers)) x;
+    IF blocked > 0 THEN
+        RAISE EXCEPTION 'Aborting: % duplicate voucher(s) carry a verification or attachment. Review these by hand.', blocked;
+    END IF;
+END $$;
+
+-- Likewise refuse if a savings transaction is stamped with a voucher about to be deleted. It should
+-- carry the register's number, not the duplicate's; if it does not, the pair needs looking at.
+DO $$
+DECLARE
+    stamped INT;
+BEGIN
+    SELECT COUNT(*) INTO stamped FROM m_savings_account_transaction
+     WHERE voucher_no IN (SELECT voucher_no FROM dup_vouchers);
+    IF stamped > 0 THEN
+        RAISE EXCEPTION 'Aborting: % savings transaction(s) are stamped with a duplicate voucher number.', stamped;
+    END IF;
+END $$;
+
+SELECT voucher_no AS "about to delete" FROM dup_vouchers ORDER BY voucher_no;
+
+DELETE FROM m_voucher_line WHERE voucher_no IN (SELECT voucher_no FROM dup_vouchers);
+DELETE FROM m_voucher      WHERE voucher_no IN (SELECT voucher_no FROM dup_vouchers);
+
+COMMIT;