LAWS(MAD)-2009-11-573

P MADHANLAL PATEL Vs. STATE REPRESENTED

Decided On November 17, 2009
P MADHANLAL PATEL Appellant
V/S
STATE REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALASARAVAKKAM CHENNAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent/police for the alleged offence under Sections 411 IPC, seek anticipatory bail.

(2.) THE learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submits that the main accused in these cases indulged in committing robbery and they have sold the robbed jewels to the petitioner and this petitioner habitually received the jewels from the accused and the accused had already given confession and the properties should be recovered from this petitioner and custodial interrogation of this petitioner is necessary.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a pawn broker and doing business with valid licence. The petitioner has not received any jewels from the accused, but the accused Tirumalai and Sridhar pledged cell phones only and not any jewels but the police insisting the petitioner to give gold jewels. The petitioner is a respectable person and if he is arrested he may be tortured by police.