“Turning to Section 405 read with Section 406, IPC we observe that the dispute arises out of a loan transaction between the parties. The law clearly recognizes a difference between simple payment/investment of money and entrustment of money or property. A mere breach of a promise, agreement or contract does not, ipso facto, constitute the offence of the criminal breach of trust contained in Section 405 without there being a clear case of entrustment. In this context, we may note that there is nothing either in the complaint or in any material before us, pointing to the fact that any property was entrusted which was dishonestly converted for own use so as to satisfy the ingredients of Section 405 punishable under Section 406, IPC.”
– Hon’ble Justice N.V. Ramana, Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v. State of Gujarat, [Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 2019].