JUDGMENT 1. FOLLOWING an incident of free fighting between the residents of Purbasa Housing Estate and the labours and staffs of Mani Group of Company, over the demarcation of land, the Maniktala Police Station Case No. 3 dated January 5, 2008 under Sections 143/148/149/307/506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act was registered on the basis of a complaint made to the police by one Chandan Neogi, a resident of Purbasa Housing Estate against the staffs and labours of the Mani Group. Whereas, on the basis of an order passed under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah on a complaint made to the Court by Mahendra Kumar Tripathy, Law Officer of Mani Group of Companies, the Maniktala Police Station Case No. 9 of 2008 under Sections 146/147/148/149/325/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the complainant of the aforesaid case, viz., Chandan Neogi and five others. Both the aforesaid cases have already ended in charge-sheet under Sections 148/149/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. NOW, in C.R.R. No. 255 of 2010 while the charge-sheeted accuseds have sought for quashing of the charge-sheet arising out of Maniktala Police Station Case No. 3 of 2008, in C.R.R. No. 273 of 2010 the accuseds, who have been charge-sheeted in connection with Maniktala Police Station Case No. 9 of 2008 have approached this Court with a similar prayer. The aforesaid two cases are admittedly the case and counter case and as the accused persons have approached this Court seeking identical relief on identical ground, viz. quashing of the charge-sheets as the dispute between them has been settled out of Court amicably both the aforesaid criminal revisions are taken up for hearing together. Heard the Learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties in the aforesaid criminal revisions, considered the pleadings in the application for appropriate order for effecting compromise. 3. ADMITTEDLY, the offences punishable under Section 323 as well as under Section 506 are compoundable offence, except offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. However, fact remains the parties have settled their dispute amicably out of Court and they are no longer desirous to proceed against each other. In such circumstances there is no remote possibilities of the criminal cases instituted at their behest to reach to its logical conclusion. However, fact remains the parties have settled their dispute amicably out of Court and they are no longer desirous to proceed against each other. In such circumstances there is no remote possibilities of the criminal cases instituted at their behest to reach to its logical conclusion. Therefore, permitting the said prosecutions to continue any further would be completely an abuse of process of Court. Thus, for ends of justice, in my opinion, it would be just and proper to quash both the aforesaid chargesheets. Accordingly, both the impugned charge-sheets stands quashed. Both these criminal revisions stands allowed by this common judgement. In view of the disposal of the main criminal revisional applications, the applications being CRAN No. 972 of 2010 and CRAN No. 973 of 2010 also stand disposed of. Criminal Section is directed to deliver urgent Photostat certified copy of this Judgement to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.