AIR 1965 SUPREME COURT 1433 ::1965 ALL CRI R 392 ::1965 MAD L J(CRI) 519 ::1965 67 Bom LR 443 ::1965 MAH L J 487 ::1965 2 SCJ 186 ::1965 2 SCR 429 ::1965 (1) SCWR 586 ::1965 SCD 824

Supreme Court Of India

(From Bombay)*11th December, 1964

Hon'ble Judge(s): Raghubar Dayal, J. R. Mudholkar , JJ

(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.405, S.409— Criminal breach of trust - Entrustment of dominion over property is essential - Dominion of partner over partnership asset - No entrustment unless there is special agreement - Agreement authorising working partner to recover money and to utilise recoveries for partnership business - Failure to deposit money in bank - Not an offence under S. 409, I.P.C. Before a person can be said to have committed criminal breach of trust within the meaning of S.405,I.P.C. It must be established that he was either entrusted with or entrusted with dominion over property which he is said to have converted to this own use. In order to establish "entrustment of dominion" over property to an accused person the mere existence of that person's dominion over property is not enough. It must be further shown that his dominion was the result of entrustment.(Para 6) In the case of a partnership, every partner has dominion over the partnership property by reason of the fact that he is a partner. This is a kind of dominion which every owner of property has over his property. But it is not dominion of this kind which satisfies the requirements of S.105. The prosecution must @page-SC1434 further establish that dominion over the assets or a particular asset of the partnership was by a spe....