Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. All the three criminal writ applications have been filed by three different Members of the Bihar Legislative Assembly, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, for allowing them to participate in the deliberation of the House, which has commenced since last 16th December, 1996. All the petitioners, therefore, have prayed that they may be allowed to participate in the deliberation of the House, even from the Jail custody under police escort. 3. These applications are vehemently opposed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the C.B.I. by filing a counter-affidavit. 4. However, the learned Additional Advocate General No. 3 and also the learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State in all the three . cases, have not opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners, rather they have submitted before the Court, after taking instructions from the District Magistrate and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna, who are present in Court today, that they have no objection if the petitioners are produced in the House under proper police escort from the Central Jail, Beur. 5. All the three petitioners are the Members of the Bihar Legislative Assembly of different political parties. It appears that all of them are accused in the Animal Husbandry Scam Cases where the allegations against them are common. The petitioners though have invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, they cannot seek the relief as a matter of right. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in all the three writ applications have commonly submitted that even if the petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right for their production in the House, they are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. It has further been submitted that mere participation of the petitioners in the deliberation of the House shall in no way prejudice the investigation of the case, pending against them. It is also submitted that even at the face of the counter-affidavit filed by the C.B.I., no arguable question has been raised objecting the prayer of the petitioners. It has further been submitted that mere participation of the petitioners in the deliberation of the House shall in no way prejudice the investigation of the case, pending against them. It is also submitted that even at the face of the counter-affidavit filed by the C.B.I., no arguable question has been raised objecting the prayer of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners, being the Members of the Bihar Legislative Assembly, are accountable to their electorates and owing to their accountability to their electorates they have made this prayer to allow them to participate in the deliberation of the House from the Central Jail, Beur, Patna. 7. From the materials on record, we find that the petitioners are accused for the charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 13 (2), read with Section 13 (1) (c) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. From the materials on record we further find that the alleged accusations against the petitioners are of much public importance as they are alleged to have committed a crime against the society. Even though the petitioners are accountable to their electorates, they cannot seek redressal of their grievances in this Court as a matter of right. Since it is a case of public importance and the petitioners have no right as such to seek relief under Articles 226 and 227 the Constitution, in our considered view it would not be desirable for this Court to exercise its discretion under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution in favour of the petitioners. 8. in the above view of the matter, these three writ applications are dismissed.