IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).5045 OF 2024 (ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRIMINAL) NO(S).7303/2024)
DILLIP KUMAR BARAL APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
RASMI RANJAN PRUSTY & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing for first to sixth respondents. Other
respondents have been served. However, none has entered appearance
on their behalf.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellant filed a petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India before the High Court alleging that his
arrest was illegal. Apart from many other contentions, his
contention was that the Police officials have violated the law laid
down by this Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar &
Anr.1. The impugned order reads thus:
“1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to approach the Court where the matter is pending ventilating his grievance by way of application as provided under Cr.P.C.
3. The CRLMP is accordingly, disposed of.”
4. This was a case where serious allegations of violation of
rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India were made. The
contention in short was that the arrest of the appellant was
1 (2014) 8 SCC 273
1
ill...