[20]On perusal ofthe allegations contained rnr he complaint, in light of ingredrents of Section 406 lpC, ree: in the context of Sectron 405 lPC, do not find that any of.€ 1ce of criminal breach of trust has been made out. lt is trit I law every act of breach of trust may not result in a penal of.e rce unless there is evidence of a manipulating act of frauc r ,:nt misappropriation of property entrusted to him. ln the cas : of criminal breach of trust, if a person comes into possej cn of the property and receives it legally, but illegally retair r; it or converts it to its own use against the terms of cont :rct, then the question whether such retention is with dishrr ,_.st intention or not and whether such retention involves cri r ral breach of trust or only a civil liability would depend upon the facts and crrcumstances of the case ln the present ) ;e. the complainant/responder has failed to establish tte ingredients essential to constitute an offence Sectior 106 lPC. The complainant/respondent No 2 has failed to ) :rce material on record to show us as to how he had entru led property to the appellant Furthermore, the conrplaint rlso omits to aver as to how the property, so entrusted t) the appellant, was dishonestly misappropriated or convert€ ( for his own use, thereby committing a breach of trust.,
