Criminal Misappropriation

Criminal Breach of Trust

Sec. 314 defines criminal misappropriation.

Sec 316 defines criminal breach of trust.

According to Sec. 314, Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years & with fine.

According to Sec. 316, whoever being in any manner entrusted with any property, or 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, expressed or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits criminal breach of trust.

No entrustment required

Entrustment is essential

Property comes into possession by accident or otherwise.

Property is given intentionally

Focus on conversion

Focus on violation of trust

Simple offense

More serious offense

No fiduciary relationship

Fiduciary relationship exists.

Example: - Finding lost property & keeping it

Example: - Trustee misusing funds

Initial possession may be innocent.

Initial possession is lawful.

Dishonestly arises later.

Dishonestly arises during misuse.

No Contractual duty generally involves.

often involves contractual or legal duty.

Lower punishment.

Higher punishment.

Ownership not transferred.

Property entrusted for purpose.

Less moral blameworthiness

Higher moral blameworthiness

Can occur without relationship.

Requires relationship (Agent, trustee etc).

Applies to finder of goods.

Applies to bailee, agent, trustee.

No obligation to return initially.

Obligation to return property.

Simple proof required.

Requires proof of entrustment + breach.

No specific direction needed.

Violation of direction of law or contract.

Ramaswamy Nadar v. State of Madras.

R.K Dalmia v. Delhi Administration.