Gokul Prasad, J.
1. The only point raised in this revision is that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to bind over the accused under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code, inasmuch as the accused does not reside within the territorial limits of his jurisdiction. It is true that in the case of a Magistrate of the first Class one of the necessary requisites to authorise him to pass an order under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code is that the person informed against and the place where the breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended are within the local limits of the Magistrate's jurisdiction. The contention on behalf of the applicants is that the accused are residents of a place outside such jurisdiction and, therefore, the Magistrate had no power to bind them over to keep the peace under Section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code. I cannot agree to this contention. The words 'is' and 'are' used in this section have been the subject of several cases and have been held to be synonymous with 'resides' and 'reside' vide Rajendro Chunder Roy Chowdhry, In the matter of the petition of 11 C. 737 : 10 Ind. Jur. 221 : 5 Ind., Dec. (N.S.) 1250: Dinonath Mullick v. Girji Frosonno Mookerjee 12 C. 133: 6 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 91 and Jaiprakash Lal, In the matter of the petition of 6 A. 26 (F.B.) : A.W.N. (1883) 208 : 3 Ind. Dee. (N.S.) 641. It has been further held in the case of Shama Charan Chakravarti v. Katu Mundal 24 C. 344 : 1 C.W.N. 129 : 12 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 897 that temporary residence is sufficient to give a Magistrate jurisdiction to act under that Section. It has been found that in the present case the accused were within his jurisdiction when the apprehension of the breach of the peace arose and I do not see how it can reasonably be said that the order passed by him was ultra vires. If the interpretation contended for by the learned Vakil, who appears for the applicants, is correct it simply means that the administration of justice would in some cases be impracticable, and a man residing on the boundary of a particular district cannot be prevented from making preparations for committing a breach of the peace in that district although he might be going there every hour of the day. This will seriously interfere with the administration of justice; I agree with the view of the Calcutta High Court referred to above and hold that the Magistrate had jurisdiction to bind over the accused for keeping the peace. The application is rejected.