Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93978 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 705 of 2025 Revisionist :- Mohd Rafi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Kiran Rani,Laloo Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alind Kumar,G.A.,Jai Singh Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J. In Re: Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 1 of 2025. 1. The instant criminal revision is reported to be beyond time by 157 days. 2. I have perused the contents of the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay in filing this criminal revision. 3. This Court finds that the delay of 157 days, in filing this criminal revision, has been sufficiently explained. 4. Sri Alind Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 does not have any objection if the application for condonation of delay is allowed. 5. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is hereby allowed and the delay in filing the criminal revision is condoned. In Re: Criminal Revison 1. In compliance of this Court's dated 27.5.2025, a Demand Draft of Rs. 3,10,000/- issued in favour of Opposite Party No.2 has been placed before this Court. 2. The Opposite Party No. 2 is present before this Court, in person therefore, the aforesaid Demand Draft has been handed over to him. 3. Smt. Kiran Rani, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State and Sri Alind Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 have submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise and have settled their disputes amicably. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the revisionist has argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its catena of judgments, had categorically held that in the matter of the offence punishable under Section 138 N.I. Act, the parties in dispute can settle it amicably through a compromise at any stage of the proceedings. 5. It has further been argued that since parties have settled their dispute amicably therefore, this criminal revision is liable to be allowed and the orders impugned in this criminal revision are liable to be set aside with a further direction to the trial court to release the revisionist from judicial custody, forthwith. 6. Learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 does not have any objection, if this criminal revision is allowed and the direction is issued for release of the revisionist from judicial custody, forthwith. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and I find that the parties to this criminal revision have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise. It is also noteworthy that it is well settled law through catena of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act can be settled through compromise at any stage i.e. it may be at the stage of trial or appeal or revision. 8. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this criminal revision is allowed. The order dated 13.8.2024 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/F.T.C.(First), Amroha in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2024 (Mohd. Rafi Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.) and order dated 12.12.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Amroha in Complaint Case No. 3061 of 2022 (Gulam Nabi Vs. Mohd. Rafi), are hereby set aside. 9. The trial court/competent court is hereby directed to release the revisionist from judicial custody, forthwith. Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Gaurav Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad