The court ruled that procedural safeguards regarding arrest must be followed, and previously settled issues cannot be re-litigated.

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

28.07.2025

1 Heard Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, learned counsel (through VC) assisted by Mr. Saurabh Dangi, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Vivek Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State/Respondent.

2 The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following relief(s):-

“1. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to declare the arrest of the Petitioner as illegal and in gross violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India in relation to FIR No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 registered by Anti- Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Chhattisgarh and direct that the Petitioner be released from illegal custody of the Respondent police department;

2. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash the Order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the Ld. Special Additional Sessions Judge (P.C. Act), Raipur District, Chhattisgarh granting 4 days of police custody remand of the Petitioner from 05.04.2024 till 08.04.2024 in relation to FIR No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 registered by the Respondent;

3. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash the Order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the Ld. Special Additional Sessions Judge (P.C. Act), Raipur District, Chhattisgarh granting 4 days of police custody remand of the Petitioner from

08.04.2024 till 12.04.2024 in relation to FIR No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 registered by the Respondent;

4. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s) which the Hon'ble Court deems fit & proper may kindly be pleased to grant in favour of the Petitioner;”

3 Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a declaration that his arrest on 05.04.2024 is illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of constitutional and statutory safeguards. The Petitioner also seeks quashing of the consequent Remand Orders dated 05.04.2024 and 08.04.2024 passed by the Learned Special Additional Sessions Judge (P.C. Act), Raipur District, Chhattisgarh, in connection with FIR No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 registered by the Respondent for offences under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘ IPC ’) read with Sections 7 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ‘P.C. Act’). He further submits that the Petitioner was allegedly intercepted without any prior notice on 04.04.2024 while travelling in his vehicle, detained overnight without intimation to his family, and was formally shown to be arrested only at 2:00 PM on 05.04.2024. The Petitioner contends that the arrest is illegal as no written or oral communication of the grounds of arrest was made to him, which is a mandatory constitutional requirement under Article 22(1) and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India , 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1244 and Ram Kishor Arora v. Directorate of Enforcement , Criminal Appeal No. 3865 of 2023 . It is asserted that neither the arrest panchnama, nor the remand application, nor any intimation to family members reflects that the grounds of arrest were communicated to the Petitioner. The learned Special Judge erred in relying on the case diary for presuming compliance, which is not accessible to the accused and does not satisfy constitutional mandates. The Petitioner further submits that the arrest was carried out to overreach pending proceedings before this Hon’ble Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Notably, the Petitioner had already challenged the FIR by way of a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC’) in CRMP No. 4510/2024, and this Court had granted interim protection from coercive action to similarly placed co-accused persons in CRMP No. 721/2024. The FIR in question was registered despite express judicial directions and is