As per case facts, appellants for the first time in the Supreme Court raised arguments that an Ordinance's sections were unconstitutional under the Constitution and challenged the Special Judge's jurisdiction, ... points not previously presented in their writ petition or before the High Court. The court noted the alleged offenses occurred in a past year and that the appellants had legal counsel of their choice. The question arose whether these new arguments, not previously raised, should be permitted and if the appeal itself held merit. Finally, the court dismissed the appeal, reluctant to entertain new points, stating there was no substance in the jurisdictional argument and declining to rule on the constitutional points as no specific grievance was shown for them given the availability of legal representation.