Judgment N.P.Singh, Sachchidanand Jha and G.C.Bharuka JJ. 1. This writ application has been filed by way of public (interest litigation for a direction to the State Government to establish more Courts for trial of offences under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 2. The petitioner has brought to our notice a notification, dated 26th April, 1986 issued by the State Government establishing the Courts of three Judicial Magistrate at Bhagalpur, Begusarai and Muzaffarpur which have been vested with the powers to try cases under the aforesaid Act. In that very notification, against the name of each Magistrate, different districts are mentioned and the cases arising within those districts have to be tried by them. 3. Mr. K.P. Verma, who appeared in person, urged that vesting power only in three Magistrates to try offences of so many districts under the Act aforesaid per se is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution which conceives speedy trial of criminal cases against different accused persons. 4. Although the petitioner has not furnished the .details of cases criminal cases pending in the Courts of the three Magistrates, mentioned above, but, in normal course, for accused of different districts to appear before the three Magistrates for answering the charges framed under the provisions of the Act aforesaid which also include party theft cases of railway properties must be causing great harassment to such persons. 5. The learned Advocate General, who appeared for the State, informed the Court that Government itself has considered that question and is inclined to take necessary steps for vesting power to try offences under the provisions of the said Act in a Magistrate in each district within the State of Bihar. 6. In view of the assurances given by the learned Advocate General, there is no occasion for us to issue any specific direction. However, it is expected that necessary steps in this connection shall be taken at an early date. 7. Before we part with this order, we may mention that on behalf of the petitioner the power of the State Government to establish Special Courts or Courts for differents districts of the State was not questioned and we are not expressing any opinion on that in view of the Judgments of the Supreme Court. 8. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of.