JUDGMENT 1. - This revision is directed against the order dated 5.3.2001, passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judl. Magistrate No. 14, Jaipur City, Jaipur. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this criminal revision are that one criminal case is pending before the trial Court against these petitioners for offence under Sections 147, 323 and 451 IPC. As these petitioners were absent on a particular date, their bail bonds were forfeited and the Court passed an order for issuing non-bailable warrants against them. These petitioners filed an application before the learned trial Court under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. and requested that those non-bailable warrants may be converted into bailable warrants but that application was rejected by the trial court, hence this revision. 3. It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that learned trial court had committed an error in holding that it does not have power to convert those non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants. It is urged that in the operative portion of the impugned order it is mentioned by the learned Magistrate that trial court has no power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. therefore, such an order could not be passed. It is urged that the matter was covered under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure which empowers that Court which has issued non-bailable warrant to convert them into bailable warrants. Therefore, the trial court has committed error in holding that it has no jurisdiction to convert those non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants. 4. I have also heard learned P.P. in the matter and gone through the Section 70(2) of the Cr.P.C. I am of the view that Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. fully empowers Magistrate to convert non-bailable warrants issued by him into bailable warrants. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. In the result, the impugned order dated 5.3.2001, is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial court to decide the same afresh. Learned Magistrate is further directed that he is empowered to convert non-bailable warrants issued by him into bailable warrants in a fit case. It is for him to decide the matter looking to the facts and circumstances of the case whether in this case, he should convert non-bailable warrants issued by the court against these petitioners into bailable warrants or not. 6. It is for him to decide the matter looking to the facts and circumstances of the case whether in this case, he should convert non-bailable warrants issued by the court against these petitioners into bailable warrants or not. 6. With these observations, the revision is disposed of.Revision disposed of. *******