Jaikrishnadas Manohardas Desai v. State of Bombay (1960) - CLAT PDF Download

Introduction

• This case is a significant example of criminal breach of trust and its legal consequences.

Facts

Legal Issues

• The main question was whether the appellants should be acquitted of the charges of criminal breach of trust.

Observations by the Supreme Court

• The Supreme Court noted a dispute regarding the cloth that had been entrusted to the company for dyeing, which had not been returned.
• The appellants claimed that other directors had control over the cloth, but this argument was rejected.
• There was no direct evidence of misappropriation, but the Court stated that criminal breach of trust does not require precise proof of conversion.
• The appellants argued that the cloth was lost due to pest damage but did not inform or provide evidence to the Textile Commissioner.
• Claims that one appellant was absent from Bombay were contradicted by his own admissions of visiting the mill frequently.
• The absence of accounting records raised further suspicion against the appellants.
• The High Court deemed the appellants’ defense as false and confirmed the misappropriation of the cloth.
• Referring to legal precedents, the Supreme Court upheld the charges and sentences, emphasizing the appellants’ critical role and the significant value involved.
• The sentence was deemed appropriate based on their responsibilities regarding the entrusted property.

Conclusion

• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction of both appellants for criminal breach of trust as per Section 34 of the IPC.

Legal Provisions:

• Section 409 of IPC: Deals with criminal breach of trust by public servants or agents, carrying penalties including imprisonment and fines.
• Section 34 of IPC: States that if multiple people are involved in a criminal act with a common intention, each is liable for the act as if they acted alone.