JUDGMENT : A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA, J. 1. A private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., was presented by the appellant against the respondent alleging commission of an offence punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'). Sworn statement was recorded and cognizance of the offence was taken and C.C.No.32571/1999 was registered by the XV ACMM, Bengaluru City. Accused, in response to the summons appeared and pleaded not guilty. During trial, the authorised representative of the complainant filed affidavit in lieu of examination in chief and was examined as PW-1 and Exs.P-1 to P-24 were marked. The accused filed affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief and was examined as DW-1. Another witness was examined as DW-2, whose affidavit was also filed in lieu of examination-in-chief and Exs.C1 and C1(a) were marked. The learned Magistrate by Judgment and Order dated 10.12.2007 convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and sentenced to pay fine of RS. 3,11,000/-. Upon deposit, RS. 3,09,000/- was directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation and the balance of Rs. 2,000/- forfeited by the State. In case of default to pay fine amount, the accused was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months. Assailing the said conviction, accused having filed Crl.A. No.15/2008, was acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Act, by the learned Fast Track (Sessions) Judge, FTC - II, Bengaluru City, by a Judgment and Order dated 25.11.2009. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant filed this appeal seeking to set aside the said acquittal order and to restore the judgment of conviction passed against the respondent/accused under Section 138 of the Act. 2. Heard the learned advocates on both sides and perused the record. 3. Indisputably, the accused and her witness, examined as DW-1 and DW-2 respectively, were permitted by the learned Magistrate to file their affidavits, in lieu of examination-in-chief. It is with reference to the said evidence, the said Judgments of conviction and acquittal have been passed by the Courts below. 4. In M/s. Mandvi Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v. Nimesh B. Thakore, AIR 2010 SC 1402 , Apex Court has held, that permitting the accused to file affidavit in lieu of chief examination is illegal. It is with reference to the said evidence, the said Judgments of conviction and acquittal have been passed by the Courts below. 4. In M/s. Mandvi Co-Op. Bank Ltd. v. Nimesh B. Thakore, AIR 2010 SC 1402 , Apex Court has held, that permitting the accused to file affidavit in lieu of chief examination is illegal. The said judgment was followed by this Court in the case of Anand Kumar Bhandari v. N. Narasimha Murthy And Anr., reported in (2014) 1 AKR 339. Thus, the trial conducted by the learned Magistrate being vitiated on account of procedural lapse, noticed supra, there is need for interference. 5. In the result, appeal is allowed and the impugned Judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge is set aside. The trial conducted being vitiated, the Judgment and Order dated 10.12.2007 passed in C.C. No.32571/1999 by the learned Magistrate, convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, by the Court below is also set aside. The case is remanded to the XV ACMM, Bengaluru City, for proceeding further from the stage the case was posted for leading defence evidence. The affidavits filed by the accused and her witness, in lieu of examination-in-chief shall be eschewed from consideration. However, it is open to the accused to lead defence evidence afresh. 6. All the contentions of both parties are left open. Both the parties are directed to appear before the XV ACMM, Bengaluru City, on 19.03.2016 and receive further orders. The matter shall be decided by the learned Magistrate with expedition and before 30.06.2016. 7. Return the LCR forthwith.