US prosecutors say Nikhil Gupta has no prior criminal record,sentencing deferred to June 26

102

New Delhi: US federal prosecutors have told a court that Indian national Nikhil Gupta has no prior criminal record for sentencing purposes, a position that cuts against earlier media narratives portraying him as a figure with a criminal background who entered into the alleged plot to resolve past cases.

The Delhi based Gupta is facing trial for his alleged role in the assassination attempt of Khalistani terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun.

In a sentencing submission, the US Attorney’s Office said Gupta has zero criminal history points and falls in Criminal History Category I, the lowest category under federal guidelines, indicating no proven prior convictions.

This classification is based strictly on verifiable convictions and excludes unproven allegations or intelligence inputs.

The distinction is significant because international and Indian media reports, had described Gupta as having links to narcotics or other illicit activity and suggested that his alleged involvement in the murder-for-hire plot was tied to an effort to escape or resolve prior criminal exposure.

The absence of any prior convictions in the U.S prosecution’s submission assumes added weight in the context of the case’s diplomatic backdrop.

After the allegations surfaced, the Government of India had publicly indicated it would examine the matter and extend cooperation.

Even with expected cross-border cooperation in a case of this profile, no prior convictions attributable to Gupta have been identified in court records, either in the United States or through material available to U.S prosecutors from anywhere else, underscoring the gap between earlier narrative claims and what is legally verifiable.

The case has now moved fully into the sentencing phase after Judge Victor Marrero accepted Gupta’s guilty plea in February, finding that it was made knowingly and voluntarily and supported by a factual basis.  The plea was originally entered before a magistrate judge and later ratified by the district court, eliminating the need for a trial.

Gupta has pleaded guilty to charges including murder-for-hire conspiracy, substantive murder-for-hire, and conspiracy to commit money laundering, which together carry a maximum statutory sentence of 40 years.

In a subsequent order, the court rescheduled sentencing to 26 June, directing probation authorities to submit a draft Presentence Report by 11 May and a final version by 8 June.  The report will be central to the court’s determination of sentence.

Prosecutors have indicated that, based on current calculations under the federal sentencing guidelines, Gupta faces a range of 235 to 293 months in prison, or roughly 20 to 24 years.  The estimate is driven by the underlying murder-for-hire conduct and money laundering count, and includes a two-level enhancement for obstruction of justice, with prosecutors stating that Gupta had provided materially false information to the court in a sworn declaration in 2025.

For context, the guidelines operate on an offense-level system in which reductions can significantly alter the sentencing range. In Gupta’s case, a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility lowers the range from roughly 324 to 405 months (about 27 to 34 years) to 235 to 293 months (about 20 to 24 years), effectively reducing potential exposure by about seven to nine years. The reduction is conditional on continued compliance prior to sentencing and can be withdrawn.

Based on the current guideline range, the expected sentence falls broadly in the two-decade band, and under US federal rules, a defendant typically serves about 85 percent of the imposed term in custody, with no system of early parole. This means that the bulk of any sentence would be served by Gupta in the United States before any release.

Prosecutors have also indicated that, following completion of the sentence, Gupta is likely to face removal from the United States, after which he could be returned to India.

Even within this framework, prosecutors have noted that the guideline estimate is not binding and may change, and that the court retains full discretion to impose a sentence above or below the range.

Additional penalties may include a fine in the range of $50,000 to $500,000 and a term of supervised release.

The divergence between earlier portrayals of Gupta as having a criminal past and the prosecution’s formal assertion of no prior convictions is likely to remain central as the case approaches sentencing, particularly given that claims about a prior background had been used in some accounts to explain motive in the alleged plot.