JUDGMENT : CHAMIER, J. This is an application by forty Hindus, residents of Daraganj, for revision of an order, of the District Magistrate of Allahabad, requiring them to execute bonds with sureties for keeping the peace for a period of one year. 2. On December 13 last, the day of the Bakrid, a Mahomedan Jolaha, named Ramzan, took a cow to his house in Daraganj, intending to sacrifice it there. His house is in a quarter where cows have never been sacrificed. His Hindu neighbours objected to the proposed sacrifice and they and others, after trying to persuade Ramzan, to abandon his proposal, made a demonstration in great force near his house. 3. The police reported the matter to the District Magistrate who, with the Joint Magistrate and Superintendent of Police, hurried to the spot. A leading Hindu and a leading Mahomedan, to whom the matters were referred, decided that the cow should not be sacrificed at Ramzan's house but at another place where such sacrifices had taken place on other occasions. 4. The Hindus were not satisfied with the arrangement and a large number of them rushed off to Ramzan's house in defiance of the Magistrate and police saying that they would carry off the cow and beat the Mahomedans even if they lost their lives. Ten of them were arrested and the remainder were after some difficulty dispersed. Early in January the present applicants and others were called upon by the District Magistrate to give security for keeping the peace. Meanwhile, the ten men arrested on December 13th, had been placed before the Joint Magistrate and discharged, that officer being of opinion that there was no necessity to continue the proceedings against them. They professed to be satisfied as the cow had been made over to a leading Mahomedan who undertook that it should not be sacrificed at all. After that the case was taken up against the applicants and others by the District Magistrate, who in the result made the order against which this application is directed. 5. Pandit Motilal has referred me to the case of In the matter of the petition of Basdeo,[1903] I.L.R. 26 All. 190 and has contended that according to the decision of Sir John Stanley therein security should not have been demanded of the applicants. 5. Pandit Motilal has referred me to the case of In the matter of the petition of Basdeo,[1903] I.L.R. 26 All. 190 and has contended that according to the decision of Sir John Stanley therein security should not have been demanded of the applicants. In that case a number of Hindus had interfered with a Mahomedan procession at the Moharram, but no actual breach of the peace had taken place. After the Moharram was over, the Magistrate held an enquiry and bound over a number of Hindus to keep the peace for one year. Sir John Stanley set aside the order of the Magistrate on the ground that it could not be inferred from the conduct of the applicants on that occasion that they were likely to commit a breach of the peace at the next Moharram or in the near future at all. In the course of his judgment he said:— “Section 107 pre-supposes that the person sought to be put under a rule of bail is likely (nor was likely) to commit a breach of the peace. The evidence goes to shew that the petitioners at the utmost were likely to cause a breach of the peace during the last Moharram festival. It cannot be presumed from this that they are likely to do the same at the next Moharram festival.” 6. If the evidence in that case did not shew that it was likely that the petitioners would commit a breach of the peace after the institution of proceedings, no case was established for taking security from the petitioners. That case cannot be regarded as laying down a rule that security should not be taken in a case of this kind after the occasion has passed on which ill-feeling between parties first came to a head. An affair like that which took place between the Hindus and Mahomedans of Daraganj on December 13th last in itself renders it probable that breaches of the peace will take place. An affair like that which took place between the Hindus and Mahomedans of Daraganj on December 13th last in itself renders it probable that breaches of the peace will take place. As observed by a witness called by one of the applicants, “there is no matter over which there can be more ill-feeling between Hindus and Mohamedans and the ill-feeling lasts for years.” The evidence shews that the Hindus were not at all satisfied with the outcome of the affair, that they were putting pressure upon Ramzan to leave the neighbourhood, were throwing bricks into his house, and were threatening him with violence. There is therefore evidence that the relation between the Hindus and Mahomedans were in a most unsatisfactory state notwithstanding that arrangements had been made to prevent the sacrifice of the cow which Ramzan had taken to his house. It was in fact likely that there would be a breach of the peace in the near future in fact at any moment. In my opinion the District Magistrate was fully justified in taking security from the applicants. This application is dismissed.