ORDER : (M. Nirmal Kumar, J.) (Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, praying to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in C.C.No.2010 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai and quash the same as against the petitioners alone.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking orders to call for the records in C.C.No.2010 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, and quash the same as illegal, improper and abuse of process of law. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.11.2022, at about 12.30 p.m., when the de-facto complainant was parking his car in front of his house, he found the adjacent godown employees namely Bala, Dilipan, Mohammed Ibrahim and Ajith having a wordy quarrel with his father. When the de-facto complainant questioned them, they abused him using filthy language and also assaulted the de-facto complainant and caused injury by throwing stones at him. Hence, the de-facto complainant made a complaint before the first respondent police. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the second respondent lodged a complaint before the first respondent and F.I.R. registered in Crime No.836 of 2022, after investigation, final report filed, the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.2010 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(2) of I.P.C. as against the first petitioner and under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(2) of IPC as against the petitioners 2 to 4. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the said occurrence was not a motivated one and there was no real intention to cause injury to the de-facto complainant or his father. According to the petitioners, the respondent police have filed the charge sheet with exaggerated version against them. 5. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves since they are neighbours, for the reason, sudden wordy quarrel lead to exchange of blows, it was not a premeditated attack. Now, both realized their mistakes, reconciled and second respondent is agreeing to withdraw the complaint and not willing to pursue the case. 6. Now, both realized their mistakes, reconciled and second respondent is agreeing to withdraw the complaint and not willing to pursue the case. 6. A Joint Memo of Compromise filed before this Court signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and their respective counsels. The petitioners and the second respondent present before this Court, identified by Ms.A.Jayalakshmi, Women Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Tallakulam Police Station, Madurai District, as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. This Court enquired both the parties, satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves on their own voluntarily without any compulsion. 7. In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature arising out of a wordy quarrel, a sudden quarrel leading to exchange of blows and the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the offence under Sections 294(b), 324 and 307 I.P.C. 8. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat) reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration. 9. In the light of the guidelines issued in the above said judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings in C.C.No.2010 of 2023 as against the petitioners pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature. 10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.2010 of 2023, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, is quashed as against the petitioners and the joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.