I appeared for the interview at Infosys' Bangalore campus. I reported to the venue about five minutes before the scheduled time and was asked to wait. After around 40-45 minutes, I was called in for the interview. It was a face-to-face interaction. The interviewer greeted me and introduced himself before explaining how the interview would proceed. He mentioned it would start with my self-introduction, followed by a discussion on any internship or work experience (being a fresher in my case), and then move on to my projects. I began by introducing myself — sharing my college background, my hometown, technical skillset, and highlighted a few projects that aligned with those skills. I also mentioned my participation in events and hackathons, along with some extracurricular activities. Throughout the interview, he was reviewing my resume attentively. He then asked about my internship — details like the work culture, the project I worked on, and the team dynamics. Next, I was asked to explain any one project in depth (including the internship project if I wanted). I chose to elaborate on a machine learning–based project. After my explanation, he followed up with several questions related to ML — including algorithms, models, concepts like agentic AI and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). After that, the discussion moved to Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). He started with basic questions such as the definition of SDLC, the basic flow, and types of SDLC models. I was also asked to draw the flow on a sheet of paper. He presented real-life scenarios and asked me to identify the SDLC concepts involved. One of the final questions in this section was about which SDLC model might have been used at my internship, and whether I thought a better approach could have been applied. At the end, he asked if I had any questions. I asked about Infosys training, how the domain is assigned in the DSE role since it is more generalized, and his own experience at Infosys. I also brought up concerns about work-life balance — as it’s often a topic of discussion outside — and finally asked if he had any feedback on my performance (even though I knew detailed feedback isn’t typically provided). He advised me to go into more detail when answering technical questions — he acknowledged that I knew the answers, but said elaborating further would reflect deeper understanding. Overall, it was a structured and professional interview experience. The interviewer was polite and receptive throughout, and I appreciated the opportunity to ask questions at the end.