JUDGMENT 1. This rule was issued calling upon the Magistrate of the District to show cause why the order under sec. 110, Cr. P. C., made against the applicants should not be set aside on the ground that, as against the first two Petitioners no specific grounds are made out for the purpose of passing that order, and, with respect to the third Petitioner on the ground already stated, as also on the ground that during the subsistence of the order under sec. 109 a proceeding under sec. 110 is bad under the law. We have gone through the evidence in this case and it appears to us that there is no sufficient evidence against the Petitioners on which the order under sec. 110 can be sustained. The men seem to have been convicted of certain offences before the present proceedings. That has led to their being suspected, and the witnesses for the prosecution who stated that they had the reputation of being thieves practically based their opinion upon those convictions. There is no specific ground for the reputation which these people are said to have acquired, and no instance of actual theft in which the Petitioners are said to have been concerned or any direct evidence to establish the association for the commission of theft. The evidence upon which the District Magistrate relies, that they were seen one night on a boat and that the Petitioners tried to run away, may give rise to a suspicion. But under sec. 110, as has already been held, the evidence must be of such a nature as would lead to a reasonable and definite ground for coming to the conclusion that they are habitual thieves. 2. As against Hossain Ally the order made seems to be wrong in law, as there was already an order under sec. 109 binding him down under that section. Both sections having the same object and there being an order under sec. 109, it seems to us that during the continuance of that order the order under sec. 110 is not valid. 3. We, therefore, set aside the order and direct that the Petitioners be discharged. Of course the view which we have expressed will not debar the Magistrate from taking any action upon further and sufficient materials if there be any need for it.