Judgment :- (Petitions under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying for issuance of a direction to call for the records in C.C.No.4293 and 4294 of 1999 on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and quash the same.) The petitions are filed seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings in C.C.Nos.4293 and 4294 of 1999 on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2. As both the matters are connected with each other and the parties also are one and the same, both the cases were taken up together for a common disposal. 3. The respondent, who is an Advocate by profession, has filed C.C.Nos.4293 and 4294 of 1999 for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the cheque bearing No.243363 for Rs.40,000/- and cheque bearing No.243366 for Rs.1,00,000/-, issued respectively by the petitioners herein towards Advocate fees and other expenditure due to the respondent, were returned dishonoured with an endorsement “Stop Payment”. Having issued statutory notice, the respondent has laid two complaints for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as there was no positive response from the accused to clear the dues. 4. The petitioners/accused have contended that there was no dues payable by the petitioners to the respondent. At any rate, the arrears of the legal fees cannot be classified as a legally enforceable debt. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the legal profession, which is a noble one, is not a business venture. The relationship between an Advocate and a client is based solely on the faith and trust. It is submitted that such a noble relationship cannot be degraded to the category of a debtor and a creditor relationship. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant would submit that the cheques have been issued by the petitioners only towards the Advocate fees due to the respondent. He would further submit that the trial is in progress and therefore, at this stage, the petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall not be entertained. 7. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant would submit that the cheques have been issued by the petitioners only towards the Advocate fees due to the respondent. He would further submit that the trial is in progress and therefore, at this stage, the petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall not be entertained. 7. The width of the powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is enormous and the High Court is empowered to make such orders as to prevent the abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice as held in State of Orissa Vs. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005 (1) CTC 134). 8. But the Court exercising its inherent powers will have to use the weapon from its armoury very sparingly with great caution and circumspection. The Court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry to find whether the evidence adduced during the course of trial is credit worthy and reliable. 9. If the learned Judicial Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and issues process without there being any allegation against the accused or any material implicating the accused, this Court has power to quash the proceedings. 10. In this case, the respondent has come out with an allegation in the complaints that he appeared on behalf of the petitioners before the various Fora and discharged his professional duty as lawyer and the petitioners chose to issue two cheques towards the Advocate fees due to him. 11. The Profession, of course, is a noble one. But when the amount payable to the Advocate towards fees is found due, then it becomes a debt. Such debt is legally enforceable. Though the Advocate in the legal profession is supposed to do service to the public, he is entitled under law to receive fees for the service he renders. When such amount is not paid when it becomes due, it becomes a debt. 12. Whether there was existing liability of debt or not will have to be gone into by the trial Court. This Court cannot embark upon a roving enquiry into those aspects under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 13. When such amount is not paid when it becomes due, it becomes a debt. 12. Whether there was existing liability of debt or not will have to be gone into by the trial Court. This Court cannot embark upon a roving enquiry into those aspects under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 13. Under the above circumstances, the Court finds that the petition seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings in C.C.Nos.4293 and 4294 of 1999 on the file of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai is found to be not sustainable. The petitioners are at liberty to raise all these points before the trial Court which has taken up the matter for trial. 14. In the result, the criminal original petitions stand dismissed. Consequently, connected criminal miscellaneous petitions also stand dismissed.