NEW DELHI: A plea bargain is likely to be arranged if Gupta agrees to claim that he was working for Indian agencies.
The trial in the alleged murder-for-hire charges against 54-year-old Indian national Nikhil Gupta is likely to commence in the coming weeks in a New York court. Earlier last month, a Czech court cleared the extradition of Gupta to New York from Prague, where he had been held since June last year for his alleged involvement in the supposed assassination attempt on Khalistani terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun.
The trial is expected to be lengthy, with US prosecutors fully committed to prosecuting Gupta, who stands accused of trying to kill an American citizen on US soil. Such killings, which Gupta is accused of by US agencies, have historically been the exclusive domain of US agencies known for carrying out overseas assassinations, both overt and covert, for strategic reasons.
The District Attorney’s office of New York intends to prosecute this case in a manner that makes Gupta an example and a deterrent. If convicted, Gupta, who is charged with two separate offences under Title 18 (United States Code, Section 1958)—murder-for-hire and conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire—could face up to 20 years in prison, as each offence carries a maximum statutory penalty of 10 years.
Under this act, if a person is actually killed, the penalty is life in prison or the death penalty and a fine of up to $250,000. If a person suffers personal injury, the penalty ranges from zero to 20 years in prison and/or a fine. If there is no death or serious injury, the penalty ranges from zero to 10 years in prison and/or a fine.
Sources believe that once Gupta’s trial starts, he might enter into a plea bargain with the Department of Justice in exchange for a reduced sentence, regular communication with family members, and better prison conditions. In his pleas before the courts in India and the Czech Republic, Gupta repeatedly raised concerns about unsafe conditions in US prisons while seeking to stop his extradition.
The plea bargain is likely to be arranged by the DA’s office if Gupta agrees to sign statements and claim that he was working for Indian agencies. The plea bargain, being a public document, could also be used by anti-India groups in Washington to set a narrative. A similar approach was adopted by the US in the case of 26/11 Mumbai attack accused David Coleman Headley, who in March 2010 pleaded guilty to a dozen federal terrorism charges, admitting his participation in planning the Mumbai attacks. Headley accepted the guilty plea proposition before US District Judge Harry Leinenweber in Federal Court in Chicago.
As per documents, Headley cooperated with the US government after his arrest on October 3, 2009. According to the plea agreement, Headley “provided substantial assistance to the criminal investigation and provided information of significant intelligence value,” after which the Attorney General authorized the US Attorney in Chicago not to seek the death penalty against him. In January 2013, Headley was sentenced to 35 years in prison. India officially requested Washington to extradite Headley on December 7, 2012. Almost 12 years later, Washington has failed to extradite him to India to face justice.
Like in India, the US also has a three-tier judicial system: District Court, Circuit Courts (appeal court), and the Supreme Court. The trial in Gupta’s case could go on for years, depending on how quickly the Justice Department wants the trial to end.
The Sunday Guardian reached out to the Department of Justice seeking an expected timeline on the proceedings against Gupta. No response was shared by the department officials. Members of Gupta’s family also refused to participate in the story.
While no official communication has been released regarding how Government of India will proceed in this case, it is understood that given reports suggesting Gupta was allegedly acting on the aid and advice of a “rogue officer”, he was, if the charges are true, working on an “unsanctioned project”.
Gupta’s family members have claimed that he is a middle-class businessman who runs a consultancy dealing with excavation and import-export from Delhi, and that he has been wrongly arrested in the case.