JUDGMENT :

(Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J.) :

1. This criminal appeal impeaches the judgment and order of conviction passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 7th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Sessions Case No. ST 04(3) 17 SC 29(8) 16 under Section 417/376 of the I.P.C. By the impugned judgment learned Trial Court recorded an order of conviction against Gaurav Bir Basnet for committing offence within the meaning of Section 417 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs. 10,00,000/-out of which Rs. 8,00,000/-shall be paid to the victim as compensation and Rs. 2,00,000/-shall be deposited in the State Exchequer with a default clause of rigorous imprisonment for one year. Before entering into the merit of the appeal, I wish to point out that in a proceeding under Section 376/417 of the Indian Penal Code, learned Trial Court ought not to have disclosed the identity of the victim lady, which she has done. However, in this judgement identity of the victim shall not be disclosed and shall be referred to as “the victim Ms. X”.

2. Briefly stated, on 13th March, 2015, the victim lady informed the Officer-in-charge of Pragati Maidan Police Station in writing that sometime in the month of February, 2014 she went to attend an interview for job to ITC Sonar, Kolkata where she met Mr. Gaurav Bir Basnet, the Front Office Manager. During the interview Mr. Basnet showed his interest in the personal life of the informant than her professional life. His behaviour was informal, he kept flirting with the informant by putting several compliments. Finally he asked for the telephone number of the informant and he was obliged. Within few days Mr. Basnet started sending messages to the informant, invited her for a meal. Initially the informant avoided such request but finally she paid him a visit at the Aqua, at Park Hotel. During such meeting Mr. Basnet depicted himself as unhappy man who has been living separately from his wife on mutual agreement and enduring the trauma of a virtually broken marriage, and thus won the heart of the informant. He even invited the informant at his flat at 54A/BC Road Building Complex and Active Acre, Veronica Building, Tower 6B, flat no. 12F, Kolkata-700015. Job of the informant was confirmed in ITC Sonar on the 1st March, 2014 and soon after the accused asked her to move into his flat at the aforesaid address, an accommodation, that was given to him by Company. The informant though was hesitant, ultimately started living together with Mr. Basnet and everyone in the building thought that they were a married couple. They went for trips together. Parents of the informant were aware of such development but at the same time they wanted their daughter to get married. When the informant shared the thoughts of her parents to Mr. Basnet he did not give any positive response. However, Mr. Basnet spoke to her parents and assured them of his divorce proceeding with his wife. From January, 2015, however, things took a drastic turn. The accused person started pestering the informant to quit the job and also started making various excuses regarding delay in filing the suit for divorce. The informant agreed to quit her job. In the mean time, Mr. Basnet informed her that his wife might come to Kolkata to create a scene and for that they decided to take refuge to her friend’s place to avoid any untoward situation. For about fortnight they stayed in the friend’s home of the informant at Lake Gardens. On 14th February, 2015, Mr. Basnet showed certain messages and ultimately he left for Bombay being told by the relatives of his wife. The informant further disclosed that she indulged in sexual relationship with Mr. Basnet who gave her a rosy picture of happily married conjugal life. After coming back Mr. Basnet said that he had to change his mind as divorce would adversely affect his daughter who was his priority, as well as, it would affect the prestige of his family in the society. The informant felt