JUDGMENT : Ashim Kumar Roy, J. In connection with a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, now pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Bankura, the wife-opposite party moved an application for amendment of her application so far that relates to the date when she was driven out from her matrimonial home. The court below allowed the said application on contest. 2. Now, the petitioner challenged the said order in this criminal revision. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on two decisions of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, one in the case of Mohd. Akhtar Siddiqui alias Babar v. State of U.P. & Ors. reported in 2009(3) ACR 3346 : I (2010) DMC 396 and another in the case of Bishambhar Dass v. Smt. Anguri & Anr. reported in 1978 AWC 25 All. : 1978 Cri. LJ 385 and submitted that since Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for amendment, therefore, the order is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction. 4. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the State vehemently resisted this application and he relied on a decision of a co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of Joyanta Shit v. Smt. Lakshmi Shit reported in 1996 C. Cr. L.R. (Cal) 292, where our High Court held in connection with an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure amendment is legally permissible. He also relied on at least seven decisions of different High Courts in support of his contention. The same are as follows:- (1) Jayprakash Sumantrao Kale v. Chandrakala Jayprakash Kale reported in 1984 CRI L.J. 1257, (2) Smt. Sneha Lata & Anr. v. Ajay Kumar Khanna & Anr. reported in 1999 Cri. L.J. 4209, (3) Sainulabdheen v. Shansudin & Anr. reported in 2004 Cri. L.J. 2351, (4) Sabita Sahoo v. Khirod Kumar Sahoo reported in 1990 (2) D.M.C. 435, (5) Eshaan Ansari v. State of Jharkhand reported in 2007(2) DMC 751 (JHAR) and (6) Chinnappaiyan v. Chinnathayee reported in 2010(2) ML J (Cri) 695. 5. I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. 6. Although the decisions of the other High Courts has a persuasive value so far this court is concerned but this court is bound by a coordinate Bench of its own court unless the court finds any sufficient reason to differ from the same. 5. I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. 6. Although the decisions of the other High Courts has a persuasive value so far this court is concerned but this court is bound by a coordinate Bench of its own court unless the court finds any sufficient reason to differ from the same. 7. In this case in question, I find the decision of a co-ordinate bench of this High Court is well-reasoned and it was authoritatively held that in a proceeding under section 125 CrPC amendment is permissible. I therefore, find no merit in this criminal revision and same is dismissed. 8. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order be given to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible. 9. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court below.