should be quashed or not. More so, when the FIR alleges an act which is reflective of a dishonest conduct of the accused. Page 9 of 1120. In the instant case, the FIR alleges that the accused took original complainant’s Truck/ Trailor on hire for a period starting from 14.07.2014 up to 31.03.2016 at a monthly rent of Rs.33,000/- but, after payment of 1st month rent, the rent was not paid despite false assurances. The allegation that rent was not paid by itself, in ordinary course, would presuppose retention of possession of the vehicle by the accused. In such circumstances as to what happened to that Truck becomes a matter of investigation. If it had been dishonestly disposed of by the accused, it may make out a case of criminal breach of trust. Therefore, there was no justification to quash the FIR at the threshold without looking into the materials collected during the course of the investigation. 21. In our view, the High Court ought to have considered the materials collected