Introduction-
The Indian Penal Code, 1860’s Section 405 defines criminal breach of trust. It is referred to as “dishonest misappropriation” or “conversion to own use” in this section. Criminal misappropriation (under Section 403) and criminal breach of trust are distinguished from one another by the fact that in the former, the accused is given possession of, power over, or control over the property. Although the scope of this section is broad, the ‘entrustment’ of the property is a requirement for an offence to be punished under Sec. 405 of the IPC. In Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code, Section 405, is where the provision for Criminal Breach of Trust is mentioned. The Indian Penal Code’s Section 405 reads: “Whoever, having been in any way entrusted with property or having 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 manner 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 willfully.
Details of the concept –
The following are the necessary elements for the crime of criminal breach of trust: The accused must be given possession of the property or dominion over it; the person to whom the property has been entrusted must use it; the person to whom the property has been entrusted must dispose of it; the accused must dishonestly use or dispose of the property or wilfully permit any other person to do so in violation; of any direction of law prescribing the manner in which such trust is to be discharged; or Such a breach of trust by public employees or bankers, merchants, or agents is prohibited under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The parties involved in such cases specifically have a fiduciary relationship. Compared to regular citizens, public employees are given more trust, because they have positions with more authority. Therefore, in contrast to the punishment meted out to ordinary offenders, any such breach of trust is subject to more severe punishment, even up to and including life in prison. The offence of “embezzlement” under English law is comparable to the offence of “criminal breach of trust,” as described under section 405 of the IPC. According to a reading of the section, “dishonest misappropriation” or “conversion to own use” of another person’s property, which is nothing more than the offence of criminal misappropriation as described under this section, is the essence of the crime of criminal breach of trust. The accused is entrusted with property or with dominion or control over the property in cases of criminal breach of trust, which is the only distinction between the two. Entrustment of property is a necessary prerequisite before any offence under this section occurs, as the offence’s name implies. The section’s language is extremely diverse. “In any manner entrusted with property” is the phrase used. Therefore, it covers all types of entrustments, whether they are made to employees, servants, business partners, or other people, so long as they are in a position of trust. “The phrase “entrusted,” which appears in Section 405, IPC, controls both the phrase “or with any dominion over the property” and the words immediately after it, “with the property.”
Meaning of Entrustment: As the offence’s name implies, entrusting property is a necessary prerequisite before any violation of this section is committed. This section has a lot of different languages. The phrase “in any manner entrusted with property” is used. Therefore, it encompasses all types of entrustments, whether to clerks, servants, business partners, or others people, as long as they are in a position of “trust.”
Entrust isn’t an cultural term. The description of” entrusted” is broad enough to cover all situations in which property is freely transferred for a specific use but is dishonestly disposed of in violation of the conditions of the transfer. It isn’t necessary to express trust; it might beimplied.However, also it can be committed, If a certain kind of property can be subject to the conditioning covered by the offence established in a given section of the IPC. This doesn’t depend on how the word” property” is defined, still. Misappropriation The core of this section is dishonest misappropriation. According to Section 24 of the IPC, lying results in a person’s unjust gain or unlawful loss. In Section 23 of the IPC, the terms” unlawful gain” and” unlawful loss” are defined. It isn’t sufficient to show that the plutocrat has not been reckoned for or has been handled inaptly in order for it to be anoffence.The indicted’s dishonest use of the property for his particular use or another unauthorised use must be proven. For the charge of felonious breach of trust to be proven.
Felonious Misappropriationvs. Felonious Breach of Trust Differences The following are the offences of Felonious Misappropriation and Felonious Breach of Trust Dishonest misappropriation of property is defined in Section 403 of the IPC as” Whoever dishonestly mis- appropriates or converts to his own use any portable property.” Whereas, according to Section 405, IPC, a felonious breach of trust is defined as” Whoever, having been in any way entrusted with property or having 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 defining the mode in which similar trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or inferred, which he has made concerning the felonious breach of trust. factors of a felonious trust violation Felonious breach of trust is substantially caused by two factors 1 A property must have been entrusted to the indicted, and 2 they must have utilised or disposed of the property dishonestly or 3 by dishonestly thieving it.
Conclusion – Consignment and dishonest theft of the property are the two abecedarian factors of a felonious breach of trust, according to Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. thus, it’s pivotal that both conditions of the felonious breach of trust be met in order for the act to be considered an offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. According to Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the penalty for felonious breach of trust is either imprisonment, which is punishable by a maximum judgment of three times, or a fine, or both, depending on the type of lawbreaker.
Case law and refrences– 1 The Supreme Court ruled in R K Dalmiav. Delhi Administration that the term” property” has a far broader meaning in the law than the term” portable property.” There’s no compelling reason to limit the description of” property,” as used in Section 405, to solely relate to transmittable property. 2 In the case of Shivnatrayanv. State of Maharashtra, it was determined that a commercial director held the status of a trustee and had dominion and control over the means that had come into his possession.