https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298316 Conviction for criminal breach of trust and allied offences could not rest on a failed conspiracy charge or on the accused's office as Chairman. The prosecution had to prove personal involvement through direct or circumstantial evidence and establish mens rea beyond reasonable doubt. Mere signing of papers, approval of tenders, or supervisory status did not create vicarious criminal liability. On the facts, there was no proof that the accused knew of the alleged defalcations, fictitious firms, or missing assets, so the conviction and sentences were unsustainable and were set aside. en-us Wed, 09 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Oct 2021 10:52:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298316 Conviction for criminal breach of trust and allied offences could not rest on a failed conspiracy charge or on the accused's office as Chairman. The prosecution had to prove personal involvement through direct or circumstantial evidence and establish mens rea beyond reasonable doubt. Mere signing of papers, approval of tenders, or supervisory status did not create vicarious criminal liability. On the facts, there was no proof that the accused knew of the alleged defalcations, fictitious firms, or missing assets, so the conviction and sentences were unsustainable and were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298316