JUDGMENT : SANJAY PRASAD, J. It appears from the compliance report sent by Sri Rajkamal Mishra, learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Lohardaga vide letter no.79 dated 22.01.2025 and also the letter no.21 dated 22.01.2025 sent by Ms. Jaya Smita Kujur, J.M. 1st, Lohardaga (I/c Court of Ms. S.N. Tigga, J.M. 1st Class) to the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge that non-bailable warrant of arrest has been recalled against the petitioner namely Sunita Bhagat. 2. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 17.01.2024 passed by Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No.34 of 2023 by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.04.2023 passed by Miss Suchita Nidhi Tigga, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Lohardaga in Complaint Case No.437 of 2019 (T.R. No.521 of 2023) by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I Act and sentenced to under S.I for Six (06) months and to pay compensation of Rs.3,50,000/-. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2. It is submitted that the petitioner has been exempted from surrender vide order dated 21.01.2025 passed by this Court in I. A No.12057 of 2024 and she has paid Rs.3,50,000/- to the O.P. No.2 and as such this Criminal Revision Application may be allowed and the petitioner may be acquitted. 4. Learned APP for the State has raised no objection. 5. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 has also admitted the factum of compromise and submitted that the O.P. No.2 has received the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- in which Rs.3,00,000/- was paid as cash on 09.05.2024 and Rs.50,000/- was paid by Cheque No.00042 on 01.08.2024. 6. It is submitted that the Joint Compromise Petition could not be filed as the Complainant-O.P. No.2 is an old aged lady. However, She has instructed her counsel, Mr. Ajit Kumar Dubey to make submission about compromise between the parties. 7. Perused the records of this case and considered the submission of both the sides. 8. It appears that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2. 9. However, She has instructed her counsel, Mr. Ajit Kumar Dubey to make submission about compromise between the parties. 7. Perused the records of this case and considered the submission of both the sides. 8. It appears that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2. 9. In view of the submission made at Bar by learned counsel for both the sides and also in view of the fact that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the O.P. No.2, the judgment dated 17.01.2024 passed by Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No.34 of 2023 and the judgment of conviction dated 29.04.2023 passed by Miss Suchita Nidhi Tigga, Judicial 2019 (T.R. No.521 of 2023) are set aside and the petitioner namely Sunita Bhagat is acquitted for the offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act and the petitioner-Sunita Bhagat is discharged from the liability of bail bonds. 10. Accordingly, Cr. Revision No.103 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of.