JUDGMENT 1. In this case a rule was issued, calling upon the District Magistrate as also upon the complainant to show cause why the case should not be transferred from the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Narail to that of some other Magistrate in the District competent to try it, on the ground that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate by issuing warrants in the film instance and afterwards by exacting very heavy bail from the petitioners has given them occasion to be apprehensive that they may not haves a fair trial. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate has submitted an explanation and the complainant has appeared by learned counsel. 2. We are of opinion that the Petitioners are justified in apprehending that they may not have a fair trial before the trying Magistrate, and we think that under those circumstances the case ought to be transferred to some other Magistrate for trial. 3. We think also that the Petitioners ought to pay to the complainant the costs which she incurred in prosecuting the case before the present Magistrate. The pleader for the Petitioners is willing to pay all reasonable costs incurred by the complainant, to be assessed by the trying Magistrate. The pleader for the complainant has no objection, on that being done, to the case being transferred. The sum of Re. 10 paid by the Petitioners will be taken into account in assessing the above costs. We make the rule absolute on that basis and direct that the case be transferred to the District Magistrate to be tried either by him or by some Magistrate subordinate to him who may be competent.