The mess in Bihar

Reading the exceedingly sensible (and unanimous) opinion expressed in the Letters to the Editor section in The Hindu, I am wondering what possible reason the judges could have had for going ahead with the elections in Bihar and not simply reinstating the dissolved assembly. No doubt they will rationalise their decision by citing some precedent or an arcane section in the constitution, but their actions right now are analogous to saying that a thief is guilty, but that he can keep the loot. On second thoughts, maybe the cost already incurred for the fresh elections might have been a deciding factor. But then, should expediency be allowed to prevail over justice?