R.D. Kothari, J.

The applicant seeks amendment in the application.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Budhbhatti for the applicant and respondent no. 2 - party-in-person.

3. The learned advocate for the applicant has drawn attention of the Court to the proposed draft amendment, wherein grounds (I), (J), (K) & (L) are mentioned and additional relief (11)(G) is mentioned.

4. Opposing the proposed draft amendment respondent no. 2 - party -in-person has drawn attention of the Court to the order passed by this Court in Criminal Revision Application No. 478 of 2014 on 05.09.2014. Further, it was submitted that the draft amendment is not proper, more particularly, the relief clause wherein the applicant's prayer gives impression that the charges against all are to be quashed. At this stage, and more particularly, in case wherein besides the present applicant, there are other accused also, such prayer cannot be granted.

5. In reply, the learned advocate for the applicant submits that his prayer is restricted for quashing of the charges and proceedings in respect of the applicant only.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocate for the applicant and respondent no. 2 - party-