JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. By way of these two revision petitions under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have prayed for converting their non-bailable warrants issued by the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 19.6.2010 while allowing the application under Section 319, Cr.P.C. and along with three other co-accused persons namely, Krishan Lal, Subhash and Sheshkara @ Om Prakash. Since, the witnesses also named the present two petitioners, namely, Hanuman @ Kalu Ram and Mahi Ram, therefore, the learned trial Court allowed the application under Section 319, Cr.P.C. and issued non-bailable warrant against them. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court delivered in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. v. State of Uttaranchal & Ors., reported in 2008 (1) SCC (Cri.) 259 and judgment of the Co-ordiante Bench of this Court in the case of Mohan Lal v. State of Rajasthan, reported 2008 (2) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1080 and submitted that the accused-petitioners have been implicated while allowing the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., however, they are ready to appeal before the learned trial Court on all the dates during the trial then there is no need to get them arrested by issuing non-bailable warrants against them. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that co-accused persons namely. Krishan Lai, Subhash and Sheshkara @ Om Prakash have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Cri. Misc. 2nd Bail Application No. 780/2008, Krishan Lal & Ors. v. State, decided on 21.2.2008 . 4. Per coptra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the present petition and submitted that it is not necessary that in all cases only bailable warrants should be issued when the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is allowed by the learned trial Court with application of mind. However, it depends upon the gravity of the offence. He also submitted that offences alleged against the petitioners is under Sections 307/149, 326/149, 325/149, 324/149, 323/149, 143, 341, 342, 385/149,147 and 148 of I.P.C., therefore, the order impugned is unassailable. 5. However, it depends upon the gravity of the offence. He also submitted that offences alleged against the petitioners is under Sections 307/149, 326/149, 325/149, 324/149, 323/149, 143, 341, 342, 385/149,147 and 148 of I.P.C., therefore, the order impugned is unassailable. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor at length and considering the fact that three co-accused persons, referred above, have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.2.2008, this Court considers it expedient to convert the non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants issued by the learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 19.6.2010 against the petitioners, namely, Hanuman . Kalu Ram and Mahi Ram. 6. Accordingly, the present revision petition is disposed of. Tire accused petitioners shall appear before the learned trial Court on 6.12.2010 and furnish bail bonds to the extent of Rs. 20,000/- along with two sureties. *******