Judgment : When the petitioners presented the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C in the Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, it was returned for presentation before proper Court having territorial jurisdiction. When the same petition was presented before the Sessions Judge, Adilabad, it was again returned stating that the said Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the bail application, as II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad, remanded the accused and as the said Magistrate is within the control of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The order returning bail application by Sessions Judge, Adilabad is erroneous. 2) The petitioners 1 and 2/A-1 and A-2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. It took place in S-7 coach of Bilaspur-Ernakulam express in between Bellampalli-Ramagundam Railway Stations. Though the competent Magistrate to order the accused for judicial remand is the II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad, no part of the offence took place within the territorial limits of the Sessions Division of Hyderabad. Section 183 Cr.P.C reads as follows: “183: Offence committed on journey or voyage When an offence is committed whilst the person by or against whom, or the thing in respect of which, the offence is committed is in the course of performing a journey or voyage, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a court through or into whose local jurisdiction that person or thing passed in the course of that journey or voyage.” As per the above provision, in case an offence was committed in the course of performing a journey, it may be tried by a Court through or into whose local jurisdiction that person passed in the course of that journey. Bilaspur-Ernakulam express did not pass through Sessions Division of Hyderabad. It passed through territory covered by the Sessions Division of Adilabad. At the same time, the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad has got territorial jurisdiction over the railways in Adilabad District also. Even though II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad works within the administrative unit of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, the said Magistrate cannot commit the present case after filing of charge sheet to the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad since no part of the cause of action for this case arose within the Sessions Division of Hyderabad. The jurisdiction of II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad includes several Sessions Divisions in Telangana Region of Andhra Pradesh. The jurisdiction of II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad includes several Sessions Divisions in Telangana Region of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, at the time of committal, the II Metropolitan Magistrate has to commit a case depending upon the Sessions Division in which the offence was committed. He cannot commit all the cases to only the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. In that view of the matter, in the present case, the Sessions Judge at Adilabad is having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 3) Hence, the petition is disposed of permitting the petitioners to present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in this case in the Sessions Court at Adilabad, in which event that Court will dispose of the petition on merits. The original application filed along with this petition shall be returned to the petitioners’ counsel.