' The S.I. Present in the Court has produced the alleged detenus. The learned counsel for respondents Nos.3 and 4 has stated that the alleged detenus were not kept in illegal detention and that in fact they have filed this petition to misappropriate the amount which had been paid to them in advance and that respondents Nos.3 and 4 had made some payment to them for working on their brick Kiln. However, he has stated that there was no restriction on the movement of the alleged detenus and that They were not being held in illegal detention by respondents Nos.3 and 4.
2. As the alleged detenus have been produced before the Court, they are released and allowed to proceed to whatever place they want to. So far as the claim of respondents Nos.3 to 5 is concerned, they can have recourse to the competent forum for the recovery of any amount .Which they may have paid to the alleged detenus as advance.
3. As further proceedings in this habeas petition are not required the same is accordingly disposed of.