The judgment was delivered by the apex court in a money-laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate. A bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and N. Kotiswar Singh listed the matter on July 18 and said it would examine whether the judgment would apply retrospectively. The apex court was dealing with a plea of the Karnataka Police against a high court order that rejected an accused's custody remand in a murder case, saying he was not informed about the grounds of arrest. "Having heard Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel, we are of the opinion that the matter requires consideration. Issue notice on the special leave petition and on the prayer for interim relief…. The outcome of this judgment will have a bearing on finally deciding this matter," the bench said. The bench agreed with the contention of Luthra, appearing for the Karnataka government, that a large number of cases were pending before the high court, where it was likely that the order under challenge before the apex court in the present case would be cited as a precedent. "Place this matter for further consideration on July 18," the bench said. Luthra submitted that while dealing with a petition of murder accused Hemantha Datta, the high court had erroneously noted that the petitioner was not informed about any "worthwhile particulars, as soon as may be, upon his arrest" although the crime took place on February 16, 2023, much before the verdict in the Pankaj Bansal case was delivered. The senior counsel argued that the high court ruling would open the floodgates of similar pleas and urged the Supreme Court to clarify its position on the issue.