I.A. Ansari, J.

1. This criminal petition is directed against the judgment and order, dated 25.02.2009, passed, in Criminal Appeal No. 94/2008, by the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, while allowing the appeal, and setting aside the judgment and order, dated 25.02.2009, aforementioned, remanded the case to the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kokrajhar, directing him to deal with the case as per provisions of law. The case of the complainant may, in brief, be described thus:

(i) Accused Sazibul Islam is cousin of the complainant LB, who was a college student. On 13.08.2001, when LB was a student of a college, accused enticed her and took her from her college to Srirampur for solemnizing his marriage with her. One Samez Ali also accompanied them as a witness. Thereafter, LB was forcibly taken by accused Sazibul Islam to Coochbihar and she was kept there in a hotel, where accused Sazibul forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. After she had been put to forcible sexual intercourse, when she was crying, accused Sazibul took her signature on a marriage registration form. As a result of the sexual intercourse, which the accused so had with her, LB became pregnant and, on 24.09.2001, accused took her to Coochbihar, where she was aboned. Thereafter, accused Sazibul, instead of marrying her, solemnized his marriage with another girl, on 20.12.2000, at Dhubri. LB, then, lodged a complaint making the allegations as aforementioned and, on 26.12.2001, Complaint Case No. 494C/2002 was registered, under Sections 420, 366, 313, 312, 493' and 506, IPC, against the accused-petitioner on the basis of the said complaint. The explanation for the delay, in making the complaint belatedly was that she was misguided and there was none to help her and, hence, there was delay in lodging the complaint.

(ii) Having recorded the statements of the complainant and her witnesses, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhubri, transferred the case, for disposal, in accordance with law, to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kokrajhar, who, in turn, observed, in his order, dated 23.04.2003, that though the complainant in her complaint as well as in her statement alleged that she been kidnapped by the accused by playing fraudulent enticement and he had committed forcible sexual intercourse with her, yet her statement disclosed that she was a consenting party for having cohabitation and sexual relation with the accused. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, therefore, recorded that he found no material to substantiate the complainant's allegation of commission of offence under Sections 366/376, IPC. On the conclusion, so reached, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance, on 23.04.2003, of offences under Sections 417/494, IPC against the accused and issued process accordingly.

(iii) After recording evidence before charge, the learned trial Court framed charge against the petitioner under Sections 417 and 493 IPC. To the charges so framed, the accused pleaded not guilty.

(iv) In support of her case, the complainant examined herself and two other witnesses. The accused was, then, examined under Section 313 Cr.PC and, in his examination aforementioned, the accused denied that he had committed the offences alleged to have been committed by him, the case of the defence being that of denial. The accused also adduced evidence by examining one witness. Having held the accused guilty of an offence under Section 417, IPC, the learned trial Court convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay fine of Rs. 3,000/and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months with further direction that the fine shall, if realized, be paid to the complainant as compensation.

(v) Aggrieved by his conviction and the sentence passed against him the accused-petitioner preferred an appeal, whi