The elements of criminal breach of trust are: (1) entrustment of property, (2) dishonest misappropriation or conversion of the property, and (3) wrongful gain or loss.

1. This application in revision is directed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Patna dated the 30.08.1972 by which he directed further inquiry into the complaint filed by Ashoka Cement Ltd., opposite party.

2. The facts, in short, are that the general elections for the Bihar Legislative Assembly were to be held in February, 1967. The petitioner was a candidate for election to the Legislative Assembly. The petitioner being on cordial terms with the Company known as Ashoka Cement Ltd., Dalmianagar requested the latter to lend a jeep for electioneering purposes. The opposite party purchased a jeep bearing No. BRP 6446. It was registered in the name of one Pratap Singh, who was an employee of the Company and the Jeep was thereafter delivered to the petitioner along with the services of a driver. At the time of taking delivery of the Jeep from the complainant Company, the petitioner was accompanied by a friend of his named Tajammul Hussain. The Jeep was delivered to the petitioner on 16-1-1967 at Patna. For obvious reasons the petitioner did not grant a receipt in token of having received the jeep, but it was granted by Tajammul Hussain at the instance of and in the presence of the petitioner. The allegation of the complainant is that the stipulation for the loan of the jeep was that after the elections were over, the petitioner would return the jeep in good condition to the complainant. The complainant has alleged that even after the elections were completed in February, 1967, the Jeep was not returned by the petitioner. Attempts were made to persuade the petitioner to return the jeep, but all efforts of the complainant went in vain. The complainant thus alleged that the petitioner had committed criminal breach of trust in regard to the jeep by not returning it as undertaken by the petitioner at the time of the delivery thereof.

3. A complaint in regard to the allegations mentioned above was filed before the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Patna on 7-3-1970. On the same date the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation and the complaint was dismissed with the one line observation that there was no proof that the jeep had been handed over to the accused. The complainant (opposite party) then filed an application before the Sessions Judge, Patna under Sec. 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, who allowed the application and directed further inquiry by his order of the 30th of August, 1972. The petitioner has, therefore, filed the present application for setting aside the order of the learned Sessions Judge.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that prior to the filing of the complaint, the complainant had sent a registered notice on the 22nd of May, 1969 threatening legal action against the petitioner if the jeep was not returned. A reply to that registered notice was sent by the petitioner on the 30th of June, 1969 denying any liability in regard to the jeep and controverting the Companys claim. It appears that the stand of the petitioner was that he had not received any jeep from the complainant and that Tajammul Hussain was never his representative and that he had received the jeep from the President, Bihar Pradesh Congress Committee.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that no jeep was ever entrusted by the complainant to the petitioner. He submitted that there was no allegation in the complaint that the jeep had been given to the petitioner by the Company and, therefore, no offence had been committed by the petitioner. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is based upon the fact that no receipt was granted by the petitioner in token of having received the jeep. The position is undisputed that the receipt had been granted by Tajammul Hussain and not the petitioner, but that does not conclude the matter. The complainant has alleged that the petitioner and Tajammul Hussain had come together and that the petitioner had got a receipt granted by Tajammul Hussai