Criminal breach of trust

Section 27 talks about servant/wife/clerk ....on the other hand S.409 deals with Agent - banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent..... it nowhere talks about servant.

A Servant's/wife's/clerk's possession is treated as possession of the master/husband/master - primarily for the pruposes of the law of theft. If my goods are lying with servant and they are stolen - in order that theif is not able to take the defence of he not taking it out of my possession was S.27 engrafted. It is based on the principle that a master always retains constructive possession of his goods with the servant. Servant cannot therefore be held liable for S.409 as the same does not apply on him. However a servant may double as an agent w.r.t a certain area of work of the master - in that case - if there is complete abdication of possession - then he can be held liable for CBT also. Because in that capacity he is an agent not a servant - the master no longer retains constructive possession in that case.  

Though in any case he can be liable for criminal misappropriation - as goods are under his control and if he dishonestly converts it or misappropriates it to his own use.