MOHD IKRAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Joyce Irwin, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, learned brief holder for the State.

(2.) By means of this petition, moved under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for release of detenues mentioned in Para-8 of the petition from the illegal custody of respondent no.6.

(3.) Allegation of the petitioners is that the petitioners and their family had gone to work at Brick Kiln Company of respondent no.6 in the month of November 2009 on the assurance that appropriate arrangements for the petitioners and their families' stay shall be made during the course of their employment in the Brick Kiln owned by respondent no.6. But thereafter respondent no.6 did not pay heed to the petitioners' requests for payment of their wages and as a measure to subdue the petitioners put their wife and children under his own custody. Respondent no.6 is not releasing the detenues mentioned in Para-8 of the petition.