JUDGMENT : SANJAY PRASAD It appears from the order dated 26.09.2024, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Ratnaker Bhengra, as His Lordship then was) of this Court that the learned counsel for the petitioner has withdrawn this Criminal Revision in respect of Petitioner No.2, namely Abdul Mannan. 2. Thus, the case of the petitioner No.2 has been withdrawn from this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, in the subsequent orders dated 30.09.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice Ratnaker Bhengra, as His Lordship then was) and order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar), it appears that the name of the Petitioner No.2 still continues due to typographical error on the part of the Personal Assistant concerned. 3. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 30.03.2024, passed by Sri Shahzad Mohammad Shahzad, the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XXI, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 2020 dismissing the appeal by affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.03.2020, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 533 of 2007, by which the petitioner has been convicted under Section 406 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Two (02) years and to pay the fine of Rs.10,000/-. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to settle the dispute with O.P. No.2 and also ready to return the amount in question to the O.P. No.2 and as such the matter may be sent for Mediation to JHALSA. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 10.09.2024 and hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.However, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has submitted that the O.P. No. 2 is also ready to settle the dispute with the petitioner. 6. Under the circumstances, the petitioner, namely Haji Md. @ Md. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail.However, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has submitted that the O.P. No. 2 is also ready to settle the dispute with the petitioner. 6. Under the circumstances, the petitioner, namely Haji Md. @ Md. Muslim is directed to be released on Provisional Bail for a period of Four (04) months from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 533 of 2007, subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the petitioner and the other bailor must be having landed property in the district of Ranchi. 7. Thus, I.A. No.10560 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of. 8. I.A. No. 12891 of 2024, filed for early hearing of the case, is dismissed as not pressed. Criminal Revision No. 615 of 2024 9. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the O.P. No.2, the matter is referred to Mediation before JHALSA. 10. Both the petitioner and the O.P. No.2 are directed to appear before learned Member Secretary, JHALSA on 25.02.2025. The learned Member Secretary, JHALSA shall appoint a Mediator for the amicable settlement of the dispute between both the sides and shall submit the report before this Court on or before 25 th March, 2025. 11. Put up this case on 28 th March, 2025. 12. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Member Secretary, JHALSA for the needful by Fax.