Law Insider India

Legal News, Current Trends and Legal Insight | Supreme Court of India and High Courts

No Offence u/s 405 IPC Attracted, If There Was Not Entrustment of Property with Accused

2 min read
Judge Gavel Law Insider

Shivani Thakur

Published on: May 24, 2022 at 19:16 IST

The Supreme Court observed that, the offence of Criminal Breach of Trust under Section 405 of the Indian Penal Code will not be attracted if there was no entrustment of the property with the accused.

The Complainant submitted his bid through his company M/s JK Waste Recycling Private Limited. Later, a FIR under Sections 285, 406, 420 and 427 r/w Section 34 of the IPC was filed alleging that Accused sent some composite material which contains injurious and hazardous and volatile sulfuric chemicals for recycling.

The Bombay High Court allowing the Petition filed by the Accused, cancel the FIRs.

The Complainant filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the said order of the High Court.

The Bench comprising Justices Indira Mukherjee & CT Ravikumar noted, “The provision would also be attracted if the accused person dishonestly used or disposed of such property in violation of any direction of law.”

“The High Court rightly found that the sine qua non for attracting the said provision was the entrustment of the property with the accused persons…”

“In this case, the petitioners had handed over waste plastic material to the concerned respondent and the respondent had processed the same and made the same over to the petitioners.”

While dismissing the appeal, the Bench observed:

The FIR in the present case does not show anything done by the accused with fire or any combustible matter. The act of recycling plastic waste material or supply of plastic waste material for recycling by the Petitioner No. 2 could not be said to be an act done with fire or any combustible matter.”

“The act of the Respondents of supplying material for testing 8 and the recycling plant could not be said to be a negligent or rash act done to endanger human life. Thus, the essential ingredients of the offence were absent.”