KALPANA AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) K. K. Misra, J. By the instant Habeas Corpus petition filed on 10-11-2005 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners prayed for the release of the petitioner No. 2 who was detained in civil prison. Petitioner No. 1 is the wife of the petitioner No. 2. When the petition was taken up on 14-11-2005 for orders, it was informed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner No. 2 had already been released as soon as notice of the petition was given and he sought time for filing an amendment application. He was released in the night of 10-11-2005. Thereafter, an amendment application has been filed for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents, particularly respondents No. 2 and 5 to provide compensation to the petitioner No. 2 in order to mitigate the agony and pain created due to his illegal detention in the civil prison for two days and one night, i. e. , 9th and 10th November, 2005.

(2.) WE have heard Sri Govind Krishna, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri Arvind Tripathi, learned A. G. A. and Sri R. D. Khare, Counsel for respondents No. 4 and 5.

(3.) THE question for consideration is whether the petition is maintainable in view of the fact that the petitioner No. 2 had already been released from civil prison when the petition was taken up for orders on 14-11-2005 and whether he is entitled to claim compensation in writ jurisdiction by moving an amendment application when the petition itself was not maintainable as the cause of action no more survived.