1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2556 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 586 OF 2010 Haribhau s/o Ambadas Khillare ...Applicant Versus The Union of India and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. P. A. Kulkarni, advocate for the applicant Mr. V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED: 10TH AUGUST, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 We heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 3 The applicant in this application seeks amendment to the writ petition No. 586 of 2010. We have considered the date of filing of writ 2 petition and the date of filing the present application seeking amendment. Mr. Suryawanshi, learned counsel who appears for respondent No.2 has pointed out reply filed on behalf of the respondent No.2 to this application for amendment. In our view, this application seeking amendment after around 15 days of filing writ petition needs to be considered favourably. We have noticed that no reply is filed on behalf of the respondent No.1 Union of India. 4 Criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clause 6-A and disposed of. Necessary amendment to be carried out within one week from today. Amended copy of the writ petition to be placed on record. Copy thereof to be served on the counsel appearing of the respective respondents. Rule made absolute on the above terms. We make it clear that the respondents after receipt of the copy of amended writ petition, may file reply, if they desire to do so. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) (S.B. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/