About Criminal Breach of Trust:
Criminal breach of trust, as defined under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), refers to a specific type of offence involving the misappropriation or conversion of entrusted property by a person in violation of the trust placed in them. Criminal breach of trust under section 405 is considered a serious offence because it involves a betrayal of the trust placed in the accused. The law aims to protect property rights and ensure that individuals who are entrusted with property act responsibly and honestly. The provision for Criminal Breach of Trust is covered under Section 405 to Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). These sections deal with offences related to the dishonest misappropriation or conversion of property entrusted to someone’s care. Section 405 reads as follows:
“Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits criminal breach of trust.”
Ingredients of the offence of criminal breach of trust:
- Entrustment: The accused must have been entrusted with some property, or he must have dominion over the property in question. Entrustment refers to the act of giving responsibility or authority over the property to the accused.
- Dishonest misappropriation or conversion: The accused must have dishonestly misappropriated the entrusted property or converted it for his own use. Dishonest misappropriation means the wrongful or unauthorized use of property by the accused for his personal gain. Conversion refers to the act of changing the nature or form of the property or using it in a manner inconsistent with the terms of the entrustment.
- Intention to deceive: The accused must have acted with the intention to deceive or defraud the person who entrusted the property. There should be a dishonest intention on the part of the accused to gain an advantage or cause a loss to the person who entrusted the property.
- Knowledge or belief: The accused must have had knowledge or belief that his act of misappropriation or conversion is likely to cause wrongful loss or wrongful gain. In other words, the accused must have known or believed that his actions would result in financial loss to the person who entrusted the property or a financial gain for himself.
Penalties for criminal breach of trust committed under Section 405 IPC
The punishment for criminal breach of trust is provided under Section 406 as under,
“Whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.”
This section states that if the offense of criminal breach of trust is committed in respect of a property valued at ten rupees or upwards, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with a fine, or both.
Landmark judgments on Section 405 of the IPC:
- K. Dalmia vs Delhi Administration (1962): This case highlighted that for the offense of criminal breach of trust under section 405 IPC, it is not necessary to establish actual misappropriation of the entrusted property. It established the principle that misappropriation of the property could be constructive in nature, indicating that any act that deprives the owner of the property’s benefit or legal ownership can constitute misappropriation.
- State of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh (1996): In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that criminal breach of trust under section 405 IPC involves an element of entrustment of property by one person to another, and the accused’s dishonest misappropriation or conversion of that property. The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove that the accused was entrusted with the property and that there was a violation of the trust by dishonestly misappropriating or converting the property.
- M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs Neeta Bhalla (2005): This case emphasized that the offense of criminal breach of trust requires mens rea, or a guilty mind. The Supreme Court held that in addition to the act of misappropriation or conversion, the accused must have had the intention to misappropriate or dishonestly convert the property entrusted to them. Mere breach of trust, without dishonest or fraudulent intent, would not constitute the offense.
- Radhakrishnan vs State of Kerala (2009): This judgment highlighted that a person can be charged with criminal breach of trust even if they are a co-owner or co-trustee of the property. The court held that if one co-owner misappropriates or converts the property entrusted to them for their personal benefit or in violation of the trust, it would amount to the offense of criminal breach of trust under section 405.
One Response
The matter is that the criminal bicap trust have been committed between the husband and wife by transfer in the amount of rupees more than 60 lacs from the joint account and letter the petitions were file by them wife in domestic violence, divorce, and maintenance
Kindly issue guidelines as the matter is pending before the marriagestate of first class
Adv.Mukund Ambekar