This article has been written by Mr. Satyam Singh, a student studying BBA LLB (H) from Netaji Subhas University, Jamshedpur. The author is a 3rd year law student.

Introduction 

Plea bargaining is a legal process in which a defendant agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to a reduced sentence in exchange for a more lenient punishment or the dismissal of other charges. It is a common practice in the criminal justice system, and its use has become increasingly widespread over the past few decades. While plea bargaining can result in a quicker resolution to a case and save the court system time and resources, it has also been criticized for its potential to result in unjust outcomes and for its impact on the rights of defendants. In this article, we will explore the pros and cons of plea bargaining, its impact on the criminal justice system, and the ethical concerns surrounding its use. We will also examine some of the reforms that have been proposed to address these issues and to ensure that plea bargaining is used fairly and justly in the criminal justice system.

Meaning of Plea bargaining

Plea bargaining is a legal process in Indian law in which a defendant in a criminal case can negotiate with the prosecution to plead guilty to a lesser offense or to a reduced sentence in exchange for a more lenient punishment or the dismissal of other charges. This process is governed by the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and was introduced in India in 2005 through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005.

Under the Indian law, plea bargaining is available only for certain types of offenses, such as those punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, and is not applicable to cases involving offenses against women, children, and other vulnerable groups. The process of plea bargaining is voluntary, and both the prosecution and the defendant must agree to it for the plea bargain to be accepted by the court.

If the court accepts the plea bargain, the defendant must plead guilty to the offense for which the plea bargain was made, and the court will pass a sentence in accordance with the terms of the plea bargain. The defendant also waives their right to appeal the sentence or to seek a review of the conviction.

Plea bargaining in Indian law has been controversial, with some critics arguing that it may lead to the accused confessing to a crime they did not commit or accepting a plea bargain under duress. However, proponents of plea bargaining argue that it can help to reduce the burden on the courts, save time and resources, and provide a quicker resolution to criminal cases.

History of Plea Bargaining

The history of plea bargaining dates back several centuries, with some historians tracing its origins to the early English legal system. However, plea bargaining as it is known today began to emerge in the United States in the late 19th century.

One of the earliest recorded instances of plea bargaining in the US occurred in 1881, when a defendant in a murder case agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for a reduced sentence. This practice became more common in the early 20th century, as courts and prosecutors began to see plea bargaining as a way to reduce the backlog of cases and to achieve more efficient outcomes.

During the 1960s and 1970s, plea bargaining became even more widespread in the US, as the criminal justice system faced increasing pressure from rising crime rates and growing caseloads. Critics of plea bargaining began to argue that it undermined the fairness and integrity of the criminal justice system, and that it could result in innocent defendants pleading guilty in order to avoid the risk of a harsher sentence if they were found guilty at trial.

In response to these concerns, some US states began to introduce reforms to limit the use of plea bargaining in certain types of cases, or to require judges to review plea bargains to ensure that they were fair and just. However, plea bargaining remains a common practice in the US and in many other countries around the world, and its use continues to be a topic of debate and controversy in legal and political circles.

Plea Bargaining in India

Plea bargaining was introduced in India in 2005 through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005, and is governed by Chapter XXI A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), which was inserted by the same amendment.

1. Section 265A of the CrPC defines plea bargaining as a process in which the accused pleads guilty to the offense with which they are charged, in exchange for a lesser punishment or for the withdrawal of certain charges against them.
2. Section 265B lays down the eligibility criteria for plea bargaining, which include the following:

The offense must be punishable with imprisonment up to seven years;

The offense must not be punishable with death or life imprisonment;

The offense must not be an offense against a woman or a child below the age of 14;

The accused must not have been previously convicted for the same offense.

3. Section 265C provides for the procedure for plea bargaining, which includes the following steps:

The accused must file an application for plea bargaining before the court;

The court must conduct an inquiry to satisfy itself that the accused has voluntarily and intelligently agreed to the plea bargain;

The court must give the prosecution and the victim an opportunity to present their views on the plea bargain;

If the court is satisfied that the plea bargain is voluntary and intelligent, it may allow the accused to plead guilty to the offense in question.

4. Section 265D sets out the consequences of a plea bargain, which include the following:

The accused must plead guilty to the offense in question;

The court must award a punishment that is proportionate to the offense committed, but which is lesser than the punishment prescribed for that offense;

The accused must waive their right to trial, appeal, and review;

The accused must comply with any other conditions that the court may impose as part of the plea bargain.

5. Section 265E provides for the recording and certification of the plea bargain by the court, and for its finality once it has been recorded.

Overall, plea bargaining in India is a voluntary and restricted process, which is intended to provide a faster and more efficient resolution to certain types of criminal cases, while also ensuring that the accused’s rights are protected and that justice is served.

Types of Plea Bargaining

There are generally three types of plea bargaining: charge bargaining, sentence bargaining, and fact bargaining.

Charge Bargaining: This is the most common type of plea bargaining, in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for the prosecutor dropping more serious charges. For example, a defendant charged with murder may agree to plead guilty to manslaughter in exchange for the prosecutor dropping the murder charge.

Sentence Bargaining: In this type of plea bargaining, the defendant agrees to plead guilty to the original charge, but in exchange for a reduced sentence. For example, a defendant charged with drug possession may agree to plead guilty and receive a reduced sentence in exchange for cooperating with the prosecution by providing information about a larger drug operation.

Fact Bargaining: This type of plea bargaining involves the defendant agreeing to stipulate to certain facts or elements of the crime in exchange for a more lenient sentence. For example, a defendant charged with armed robbery may agree to stipulate that they used a weapon during the robbery, in exchange for a reduced sentence.

It’s important to note that not all types of plea bargaining are allowed in all jurisdictions. In some places, for example, fact bargaining may not be allowed, and in others, there may be limitations on the types of charges that can be subject to plea bargaining.

Plea Bargaining and Judicial Pronouncements

There have been several judicial pronouncements in India related to plea bargaining, which have helped to clarify and establish the scope and limits of this practice. Here are a few notable examples:

State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandrika: In this 2009 case, the Supreme Court of India held that plea bargaining is an important aspect of the criminal justice system, and that it can be a useful tool for reducing the burden on courts and ensuring faster and more efficient resolution of cases. The court also emphasized the importance of ensuring that plea bargains are voluntary and made with full knowledge of the consequences.

State of Gujarat v. Natwar Harchandji Thakor: In this 2012 case, the Supreme Court held that plea bargaining is not a right, but a privilege granted to the accused by the state. The court also noted that plea bargaining is not appropriate in cases involving serious offenses, and that courts should be cautious in approving plea bargains in such cases.

Raju v. State of Maharashtra: In this 2013 case, the Bombay High Court held that plea bargaining is not a substitute for a fair trial, and that courts must ensure that the accused is not being coerced or pressured into entering into a plea bargain. The court also emphasized the importance of considering the victim’s views on the plea bargain and ensuring that they are adequately compensated.

Overall, these cases illustrate the importance of ensuring that plea bargaining is used appropriately and in a manner that protects the rights of the accused and promotes justice. While plea bargaining can be a useful tool in certain cases, it is not a panacea, and courts must be vigilant to ensure that it is not being misused or abused.

Conclusion 

In conclusion, plea bargaining is a legal process that allows for the resolution of criminal cases through negotiations between the prosecution and the accused. It can be a useful tool for reducing the burden on courts and ensuring faster and more efficient resolution of cases. However, it is important to ensure that plea bargains are voluntary and made with full knowledge of the consequences, and that the accused’s rights are protected throughout the process.

In India, plea bargaining was introduced in 2005 through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, and is governed by Chapter XXI A of the Criminal Procedure Code. The eligibility criteria, procedure, and consequences of plea bargaining are defined in this chapter. There have also been several judicial pronouncements related to plea bargaining in India, which have helped to clarify and establish the scope and limits of this practice.

Overall, plea bargaining is a valuable tool for the justice system, but it must be used judiciously and in a manner that promotes justice and protects the rights of all parties involved. It is important for courts and legal professionals to continue to monitor and evaluate the use of plea bargaining to ensure that it is being used in the most effective and fair way possible.

Reference

• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandrika (2009)
• Raju v. State of Maharashtra (2013)
• State of Gujarat v. Natwar Harchandji Thakor (2012)
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/plea-bargaining-practice-india/ 

Aishwarya Says:

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 to secondinnings.hr@gmail.com

Join our  Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening