https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194393 Entrustment of cash and exclusive custody over the safe were treated as sufficient to prove criminal breach of trust, where the evidence showed the money was handed to the accused, kept in his custody, and disappeared from a place to which he alone had access. The challenge based on speculative access by others was rejected. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 was held not to bar a prosecution under Section 409 IPC where the prosecutor elected that route; sanction under that Act was required only for prosecutions launched under it, and no implied repeal or unconstitutional discrimination was found. The conviction and sentence were upheld. en-us Tue, 11 Jan 1955 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Sep 2017 18:39:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194393 Entrustment of cash and exclusive custody over the safe were treated as sufficient to prove criminal breach of trust, where the evidence showed the money was handed to the accused, kept in his custody, and disappeared from a place to which he alone had access. The challenge based on speculative access by others was rejected. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 was held not to bar a prosecution under Section 409 IPC where the prosecutor elected that route; sanction under that Act was required only for prosecutions launched under it, and no implied repeal or unconstitutional discrimination was found. The conviction and sentence were upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Jan 1955 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194393