STATE Vs. KUMUD SALOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned DSGI, appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The instant appeal under Sec. 21(1) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 read with Sec. 377, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred challenging the Final Order dtd. 26/7/2023 passed by the learned Special Court, NIA, Assam at Guwahati in Special NIA Case no. 02/2022 on the point of sentence. The two respondents herein were accused persons, who were chargesheeted in Special NIA Case no. 02/2022. Charges were framed against the two respondents as A-4 and A-5 by the learned Special Court under Sec. 120B, IPC and Sec. 38, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Before the learned Special Court, both the respondents by filing petitions, pleaded guilty to the charges and the learned Special Court after hearing the parties, has considered it appropriate to convict them and to pass sentences equal to the period of detention they have undergone as UTPs. The respondent no. 1 had spent about one year two months and twenty-four days and the respondent no. 2 had spent about one year three months and one day in incarceration on the date of the impugned Order dtd. 26/7/2023.

(3.) The appellant's counsel submits that the learned Trial Court had sentenced the respondents to simple imprisonment for 6(six) months with a fine of Rs.500.00 each, in default, simple imprisonment for 14 (fourteen) days under Sec. 120B IPC and rigorous imprisonment for the period already undergone under Sec. 38 of the UA(P) Act, 1967, which were to run concurrently. He submits that the period of detention spent as Under Trial Prisoners (UTP) could not be considered to be rigorous imprisonment. The period of imprisonment as a UTP not being rigorous in nature, the said sentence of rigorous imprisonment cannot be set off against his detention period as a UTP.