According to the Britannica,
“Plea bargaining, in law, the practice of negotiating an agreement between the prosecution and the defence whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offense or (in the case of multiple offenses) to one or more of the offenses charged in exchange for more lenient sentencing, recommendations, a specific sentence, or a dismissal of other charges.”
Plea bargaining is. in simpler words, a sort of bargain between the accused and prosecution. This is very common concept in the United States. This has proved to be successful in avoiding complicated cases and hence the number of convictions is higher in the US.
Types of Plea Bargaining
Typically, there are three types of plea bargaining.
- Sentence Bargaining – In this, the defendant can announce that he is prepared to plead guilty to the indictment and negotiates a lighter sentence in return.
- Charge bargaining – Here, the accused can plead guilty to a lighter crime than the one he was originally charged with. This is the most used form of plea bargaining in the criminal cases.
- Fact bargaining – This is the least used form of plea bargaining. This happens when the defendant agrees to disclose certain facts to prevent other facts from being used as evidence.
Plea Bargaining in India
The concept of plea bargaining is not so common in India. It is added in the Indian legal system recently, after considering the number of pending cases with the Judiciary. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 inserted sections 265A to 265L, Chapter XXIA of the Criminal Procedure Code which deals with the concept of Plea Bargaining.
Plea bargaining is allowed only for the cases in which
- The maximum sentence is 7 years of imprisonment;
- The offence does not affect the country’s socio-economic conditions;
- The crime committed is not against any women or children below the age of 14.
It is to be noted here under Indian laws, only the defendant can start a plea bargaining; in addition, the defendant must appear in court to take advantage of the opportunity for negotiation.
Applicants must submit a petition and affidavit to the court stating that it is a voluntary preference and that they understand the type and extent of penalties imposed by the law on the criminal act committed. The court then notifies the prosecutor by notice and the plaintiff or victim for a hearing. The judge must establish the voluntary nature of the request at a hearing in an in-camera inquisition where the other party is not allowed to attend. The court can then authorize prosecutors, investigators, and victims to meet to “satisfactory disposition of the case.” Often this results in the accused paying the victim’s damages and other expenses.
Once both parties are satisfied, the court will formally reach an agreement through a report signed by the parties and the presiding officer and may sentence the accused to imprisonment, which is half of the minimum sentence for the crime. If there is no specific minimum period, the sentence must be up to a quarter of the maximum legal sentence.
Arguments in favour of Plea Bargaining
When plea bargaining was first recommended in the 154th Report of the Law Commission, few benefits are pointed out such as speedy trials would be ensured, elimination the uncertainty of the outcome of criminal proceedings, save litigation costs and relieve the parties of anxiety. Overcrowding of prison was another reason which was pointed out along with the point that plea bargaining would reduce the number of pending cases in which the accused has been imprisoned for a prolonged time with no progress in the case.
Arguments against Plea Bargaining
There are certain arguments against plea bargaining in India. It may attract criticism if police are involved in this process as police in India is infamous for custodial torture. Some argue that the role of victims in the process of plea bargaining would attract corruption. The clauses of plea bargaining do not establish an independent judicial power to evaluate appeals. The in-camera hearing of the defendant by the court will lead to public cynicism and distrust in such a system. The lack of confidentiality of the court-approved refusal decision may also lead to prejudice against the defendant.
Conclusion
This is definitely a controversial concept, because few people accept it, and others have given up. The countless poor people awaiting trial in the country’s prisons will feel the consequences most clearly. The Law Commission’s discussion of the petition is clearly considered as a necessity of the moment, and no imaginary effort can be connected with the taint of the legalization of a crime. This being said, we have to remember that everything has its advantages and disadvantages, and both must be analysed to arrive at the final result. There is no reason to reject something based solely on its shortcomings. The concept of confession is developing in India. It is irrelevant, but hopefully it is perfect. It can only be improved through debate, discussion and presentation.
Aishwarya Says:
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.