Judgment : The accused in C.C.327 of 1992 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Pollachi has filed this petition under Sec. 482, Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in the aforesaid case and quash the same. 2. Short facts are: The respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioner for offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which I shall hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), in respect of the cheque dated 112. 1991. The case is in part-heard stage. P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined in full. P.W.3 was examined in chief. The case was posted for cross-examination. At that stage, this petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that prior to the filing of the complaint, the complainant had sent a notice and that was properly replied denying the very debt itself and while so, no rejoinder was sent by the complainant and that there is no document to show the debt and in the circumstances, it cannot be stated that the cheque was issued to discharge a legally enforceable liability. Learned counsel would further submit that this is a case where the cheque was returned on the ground of instruction of stop payment by the accused and the case would not fall within the ambit of Sec.138 of the Act. He would further submit that sworn statement was taken eight months after the presentation of the complaint and on which date, the offence was taken cognizance of and in those circumstances, the complaint is liable to be quashed. 4.Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would rebut the above submissions and he would further submit that inasmuch as the case is already in part-heard stage and the number of witnesses were examined in full, it may be left to the trial court to consider the above points and decide the matter and at this stage, this court need not intervene. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by rival counsels. In Amarchand Agarwala v. Shanti Bose, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 799: 1973 Crl.L.J. 577: (1973) 1 S.C.W.R. 207: 1973 S.C.C. (Crl.) 651: (1973) 4 S.C.C. 10 , the Apex Court had an occasion to consider a similar question. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by rival counsels. In Amarchand Agarwala v. Shanti Bose, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 799: 1973 Crl.L.J. 577: (1973) 1 S.C.W.R. 207: 1973 S.C.C. (Crl.) 651: (1973) 4 S.C.C. 10 , the Apex Court had an occasion to consider a similar question. In that case, the accused moved the High Court at the time when the trial was almost coming to a close and what remained to be done was the examination of two prosecution and one court witnesses and the High Court quashed the charge and the entire proceedings on the grounds that the complainant suppressed material facts and that the evidence on record did not establish the alleged offence. The Apex Court had held that in those circumstances, the proper course at that stage to be adopted by the High Court was to allow the proceedings to go on and to come to its logical conclusion, one way or the other and decline to interfere with those proceedings. The questions whether there was suppression and whether the evidence established the alleged offence were matters to be considered by the trial court after an appraisal of the entire evidence. 6. In Pashupati Nath v. Ramji, 1984 All.L.J. 504, Allahabad High Court had taken a similar view. In that case, the proceedings were for offence under Sec. 420, Indian Penal Code. The entire evidence relied upon by the complainant was let in. At that stage, the accused came to the High Court for quashing the proceedings under Sec.482, Criminal Procedure Code. The High Court declined to exercise its inherent powers under Sec.482, Criminal Procedure Code to disturb the proceedings of the trial court. 7. The ratio of the above rulings apply to the facts of this case. On that ground, I am not inclined to interfere. I am not giving any findings with regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. The trial court shall consider all these points, if raised before it. With this observation, this petition shall stand dismissed.