‘C’ is employed as cashier by a firm to receive money at its sale counter. It is his duty to make entries in the ledger showing the amounts received by him. He is prosecuted on the charge of criminal breach of trust in respect of rupees ninety thousand on the basis of evidence showing he made an entry showing that he had received rupees ten thousand only whereas he had actually received rupees one lakh. ‘C’ has taken the plea that the wrong entry was accidental and unintentional. The fact that other entries made in the same ledger are false, each showing receipt of less amount by ‘C’ is

Under Section 14 of the Evidence Act, facts showing the existence of a state of mind or intention are relevant. In criminal breach of trust cases, the defendant's intent is a crucial element. Evidence showing a pattern of false entries (showing receipts less than actually received) is highly relevant to establishing that the specific false entry in question was intentional rather than accidental, as it demonstrates a consistent course of conduct indicating dishonest intent. The systematic nature of multiple false entries makes it difficult to accept that the charged entry was an isolated mistake.