JUDGMENT 1. This is a rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Dacca to show cause why the order of the Deputy Magistrate, dated the 26th September 1907, binding down the Petitioners, under sec. 107, C. Cr. P., to keep the peace, should not be set aside. The facts of the case are these: There was a dispute between the Petitioners, on the one side, and the Maharajah of Susung, on the other, about the right of possession of an akhra situate in Dacca. This dispute has given rise to an apprehension on the part of the magisterial authorities of a probable breach of the peace. Certain constables were deputed to the akhra for two months; and it is in evidence that the accused theatened to assault the proprietors' men at the akhra. The Magistrate has accordingly bound down the Petitioners to keep the peace. 2. The learned pleader for the Petitioners now contends before us that the order of the Deputy Magistrate is unfair to his clients, as there is a bona fide dispute between the parties as to the right to the possession of the akhra. He says that his clients have instituted a civil suit for the interpretation of a kabuliyat, under which they claimed to hold possession of the akhra, and that if the Maharaja and his men do not attempt to disturb their possession, there is not the slightest chance of there being any breach of the peace. 3. It seems to us that there are some grounds for this contention and that the order of the Deputy Magistrate, binding down the Petitioners alone to keep the peace, is one which it would have been better if he had abstained from passing, because it is one which is likely to prejudice the rights of the Petitioners, seeing that, if the Maharaja's men attempt to turn them out, the Petitioners may be liable to be punished in the event of their resisting them. It would have been much better if both sides had been bound down, for then no breach of the peace would have been likely to occur pending the decision of the civil suit. It would also have been better if the Deputy Magistrate, in case he was not inclined to bind down both the parties, had instituted proceedings under sec. 145, Cr. It would also have been better if the Deputy Magistrate, in case he was not inclined to bind down both the parties, had instituted proceedings under sec. 145, Cr. P.C. and had declared the party, whom he found in actual possession, entitled to retain possession until the decision of the Civil Court. In the circumstances the order is a one-sided one and is calculated to interfere with the rights of the Petitioners. We accordingly set aside the order of the 26th September 1907, and make this rule absolute.