ORDER : 1. The petitioners have filed Crl.O.P.(MD) 4330 of 2016, seeking to call for the records pertaining to P.R.C.No.65 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli and quash the same insofar as the petitioners are concerned. The petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD) 18255 of 2013 has filed this petition to call for the records and quash the charge sheet in S.C.No.290 of 2013 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District in Crime No.333 of 2010 on the file of the 1st respondent. 2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.333 of 2010 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC r/w 25(i)(b) of Arms Act has been registered against the petitioner/accused in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.18255 of 2013 and after completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in S.C.No.290 of 2013 by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District. 3. Similarly, a counter case in Crime No.334 of 2010 for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 448, 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, has been registered against the petitioners/accused in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.4330 of 2016 and after completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which is pending in P.R.C.No.65 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli. 4. When these matters are taken up for hearing, the petitioners/Accused and the second respondents in both cases, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent Police, namely, Mr.S.Sakthivel, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station. Learned counsel appearing for the parties also endorsed the identify of their respective parties. 5. The counsel appearing on either side filed two separate joint memos of compromise respectively duly stating that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement by way of compromise among themselves, the respective second respondents have agreed for quashing of the above cases pending in P.R.C.No.65 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli and also S.C.No.290 of 2013 by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District. 6. 6. Considering the nature of allegations and in view of the joint memos of compromise, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matters pending. Therefore, the entire proceedings in P.R.C.No.65 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli and also S.C.No.290 of 2013 by the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli District, in respect of all the accused, are hereby quashed. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The joint memos of compromise shall form part of this common order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.