As per case facts, the District Manager, PUNSUP, Moga, filed a complaint alleging misappropriation of paddy by M/s Amit Rice Mills after a significant shortage was detected despite an agreement ... for milling and delivery of rice to FCI. This led to a formal case for embezzlement and criminal breach of trust, but the Trial Court acquitted the respondent, a decision upheld by the Appellate Court. The petitioner challenged these concurrent findings. The question arose whether the prosecution successfully proved the entrustment of paddy and the authenticity of the agreement and receipts, especially when forensic evidence indicated forged signatures, and if an arbitration clause negates criminal liability. Finally, the courts found that the prosecution failed to establish the execution of the agreement and entrustment of paddy. Key witnesses admitted the documents were unproven, ante-dated, and signed by unauthorized persons, with forensic evidence confirming forged signatures. While an arbitration clause doesn't bar criminal proceedings, the lack of proof of entrustment was decisive. Both lower courts provided well-reasoned findings, and a revisional court should not interfere without patent illegality or gross perversity, which was absent here.