Shacheendra Dwivedi, J. -- 1. This is a petition for habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, sent by the petitioners from, Jail on 31.10.1990, praying for a direction that they be produced before this Court and since their detention is illegal, they be ordered to be set at liberty. It has further been prayed that any other suitable order in the interest of justice may be passed.

2. The petition dated 31.10.1990 was received in the office on 31.10.1990 itself and was placed before the Court on 1.11.1990. Thereon, order was passed directing issuance of rule 'nisi' to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Gwalior, to produce the petitioners -- several in number -- in Court on 7.11.1990.

3. When the matter came up for hearing on 7.1,1.1990, a report was sent by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Gwalior, submitting that the petitioners were released on 31.10.1990, itself, by the order of the Executive Magistrate, Gwalior.

4. Out of several petitioners, one petitioner; Shri V.K. Yogi, who is also an Advocate of this Court, appeared in Court and submitted orally that the detention of the petitioners was illegal and that they are entitled for compensation from the State.

5. The fact that the petitioners were released on 31.10.1990, by the Order of the Executive Magistrate, Gwalior is not disputed. The petition does not disclose as to on which date and at what time, the petitioners were taken in custody. But the report, received from Central Jail, Gwalior, on 7.11.1990 makes a mention that the petitioners so arrested were kept in judicial custody on 29.10.1990. Time of arrest has not been given in the report and the petition is silent even about the date of arrest. The above report shows that the petitioners were detained under sections 151, 107 and 116(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Mr. V.K. Yogi has mainly submitted that though all the petitioners have been released, their arrest was illegal, not justified under law and their personal liberty having been jeopardised, they are entitled to be compensated. In his oral submissions, petitioner, Mr. V.K. Yogi, referred to the cases of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (AIR 1950 SC 27), A.K. Gopalan v. Govt. of India (AIR 1966 SC 816), Supdt., Central Prison Fatehgarh and another v. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya (AIR 1960 SC 663) and Bheemsingh v. State of J.K. (AIR 1986 SC 494).

6. It is not disputed that the petitioners have all been released from Jail and are no more in custody. It is also not in dispute that they all were arrested on 29.10.1990 and have been released on 31.10.1990. The only question for consideration, now, as submitted by petitioner, Mr. V.K. Yogi, is whether the arrest and detention of the petitioners was illegal and if that be so, are they entitled to any compensation.

7. The petition was made to the Jail Authorities for being submitted to this Court on 31.10.1990 and when the case was placed before this Court on 1.11.90, all the petitioners were no more in custody, but this fact was not brought to the notice of this Court and rule nisi was directed to be issued against Supdt. Central Jail, Gwalior, on 1.11.1990, when the petitioners were no more in custody. As the petitioners were not in custody, even on the date, on which rule nisi was ordered to be issued, i.e. 1.11.1990, the petition for habeas corpus was infructuous. Yet, the question, whether petitioners' arrest was illegal or not, survives for consideration of this Court. If the arrest of the petitioners is found to be illegal, violating the procedure established by law, their mere release from custody would not disentitle them from claiming compensation.

8. Personal liberty of a citizen having been guaranteed and protected under Articles 19 to 22 of the Constitution, and it being the basis of all fundamental rights, utmost importance has been attached to this right, which cannot be lightly taken away or abridged. Article 21 of the Constitution provides that:

"No person shall be depr