https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169412 Criminal misappropriation and criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 were not established because mere entrustment of money did not prove dishonest retention; the prosecution had to show beyond reasonable doubt that the amount was kept for an improper purpose, and the available records and testimony instead indicated that the accused had gone to the village and attempted disbursement. The accused's explanation was not required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt but only on a preponderance of probabilities, and it was found probable enough to create doubt about the prosecution case. Testimony of witnesses treated as hostile remained admissible and could be relied upon when corroborated, and no adverse inference against the accused was justified. en-us Tue, 31 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jun 2015 11:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169412 Criminal misappropriation and criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 were not established because mere entrustment of money did not prove dishonest retention; the prosecution had to show beyond reasonable doubt that the amount was kept for an improper purpose, and the available records and testimony instead indicated that the accused had gone to the village and attempted disbursement. The accused's explanation was not required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt but only on a preponderance of probabilities, and it was found probable enough to create doubt about the prosecution case. Testimony of witnesses treated as hostile remained admissible and could be relied upon when corroborated, and no adverse inference against the accused was justified. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 31 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169412