AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
We do not think that it was open to the Magistrate to convict the accused of cheating u/s 420, Indian Penal Code, as he was not charged with
that offence, and the defence evidence that would be appropriate in regard to such a charge would be different from that required on a charge of
criminal breach of trust u/s 406. We set aside the conviction u/s 420. But we think that there is evidence to support the conviction u/s 406. No
doubt the reference to interest or the security deposit suggests that the money was intended to be available for use by the accused as capital, but it
is by no means conclusive to that effect. Many other circumstances support the finding of the Magistrate on a breach of trust. We decline to
interfere with the conviction or with the sentence, which is a lenient one.