(b) (“A”) being on friendly terms with (“Z”) goes into (“Z’s”) house in (“Z’s”) absence and takes away a cooking-pot without (“Z’s”) express consent. Here, if (“A”) was under the impression that he had (“Z’s”) implied consent to take the cooking-pot for the purpose of using it, (“A”) has not committed theft. But, if (“A”) afterwards sells the cooking pot for his own benefit he is guilty of criminal misappropriation; (c) (“A”) and (“B”) being joint owners of a horse, (“A”) takes the horse out of (“B’s”) possession intending to use it. Here, as (“A”) has a right to use the horse, he does not dishonestly misappropriate it. But if (“A”) sells the horse and appropriates the whole proceeds to his own use, he is guilty of criminal misappropriation. Explanation 1 – A dishonest misappropriation for a time only is a misappropriation within the meaning of this section. Illustration:- (“A”) having borrowed (“Z’s”) property pledges it as a security for a loan intending at a future time to restore it to (“Z”), (“A”) has committed criminal misappropriation. Explanation 2 – A person, who finds property not in the possession of any other person and takes such property for the purpose of protecting it for or of restoring it to the owner, does not take or misappropriate it dishonestly and is not guilty of an offence; but he is guilty of criminal misappropriation, if he appropriates it to his own use, when he knows or has the means to discovering the owner or before he has used reasonable means to discover and give notice to the owner and has kept the property for a reasonable time to enable the owner to claim it. What are reasonable means or what is a reasonable time in such a case, is a question of fact. It is not necessary that the finder should know who is the owner of the property or that any particular person is the owner of it; it is sufficient, if, at the time of appropriating it, he does not believe it to be his own property or does not believe in good faith that the real owner cannot be found. Illustrations:(a) (“A”) finds a pound on the high-road, not knowing to whom the pound belongs. (“A”) picks up the pound. Here (“A”) has not committed criminal misappropriation; (b) (“A”) finds a letter on the road containing a bank note. From the direction and contents of the letter he learns to whom the note belongs. He appropriates the note. He is guilty of criminal misappropriation; (c) (“A”) finds a cheque payable to bearer. He can form no conjecture as to the person who has lost the cheque. But the name of the person who has drawn the cheque appears. (“A”) knows that this person can direct him to the person in whose favour the cheque was drawn. (“A”) appropriates 94