Jibangshu Paul, Son of Late Nalini Paul vs National Investigation Agency (NIA), represented by its Retainer Counsel

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Gau) 808

SANDEEP MEHTA, MITALI THAKURIA
Jibangshu Paul, Son of Late Nalini Paul – Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency (NIA), represented by its Retainer Counsel – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. D. Talukdar, Ms. P. Choudhury and Ms. B. Goswami.
For the Respondent: Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, assisted by Ms. B. Devi, Mr. Sathyanarayana, Mr. D.K. Das, assisted by Ms. G.D. Choudhury.

JUDGMENT :

(Sandeep Mehta, J.)

1. These two appeals under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC have been preferred by the appellants, namely, Jibangshu Paul and Golon Daulagopu, respectively, for assailing the judgment dated 22.05.2017 and the sentencing order dated 23.05.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, NIA in Special NIA Case No.2/2009 [National Investigation Agency (NIA) -Vs- Shri Jibangshu Paul & Anr.], whereby the appellants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below:-

Sl. No.	Name of the accused	Convicted under Section	Punishment
1.	Gulon Daulagapu	120-B IPC	R.I. for 8(eight) years and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default S.I. for 6(six) months.
		17 UA (P) Act	R.I. for 8(eight) years and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default S.I. for 6(six) months.
2.	Jibrangshu Paul	120-B IPC	R.I. for 10(ten) years and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default S.I. for 6(six) months.
		17 UA (P) Act	R.I. for 10(ten) years and fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default S.I. for 6(six) months.

2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(Gau) 808

SANDEEP MEHTA, MITALI THAKURIAJibangshu Paul, Son of Late Nalini Paul – AppellantVersusNational Investigation Agency (NIA), represented by its Retainer Counsel – Respondent

Cases Referred (4)

SANDEEP MEHTA, MITALI THAKURIA
Jibangshu Paul, Son of Late Nalini Paul – Appellant
Versus
National Investigation Agency (NIA), represented by its Retainer Counsel – Respondent