JUDGMENT 1. The rule for our consideration was granted on three grounds, first, on the objection that the proceedings under sec. 145, C. Cr. P., taken by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Manickgunge were without jurisdiction because they were based upon the report of a police-officer of the district of Faridpur in respect of land or water within the jurisdiction of that district and not within the jurisdiction of the Magistracy of Dacca; second, that the order transferring the proceedings from the Sub-Divisional Court of Manickgunge to Dacca was bad inasmuch as it had been made without notice to the Petitioner, and lastly, it was proposed to consider whether the proceedings should be taken in Manickgunge or in Faridpur as being to the convenience of the parties concerned. In regard to the first objection we find that the report of the police-officer of Faridpur was to the effect that a breach of the peace was likely to take place in consequence of a dispute concerning a piece of water lying partly in the Sub-Division of Manickgunge within the district of Dacca and partly in Faridpur. This report came before the Magistrate of Manickgunge who thereupon took proceedings under sec. 145 in respect of the water lying within his jurisdiction. There can be no valid objection to such a proceeding by reason of want of jurisdiction. 2. On the second point, we find that the District Magistrate of Dacca on the application of the other party sent for these proceedings from the Sub-Divisional Court of Manickgunge and finally, on the 14th August, in spite of the objection of the Petitioner, he transferred the case for disposal by a subordinate Magistrate holding his Court at Dacca. We think that sufficient notice was thus given to the Petitioner. 3. On the last point, we are not satisfied that there is any valid ground for holding that these proceedings should be held elsewhere than at the Court of the subordinate Magistrate of Dacca. The rule is, therefore, discharged.