PLEA

BARGAINING
NAME: SURYA AISHWARYA RAJENDRA
ROLL NO: 46 CLASS: LLM II
SUBJECT: LAW AND SOCIAL TRASFORMATION
 INTRODUCTION
• The newly appointed Law Minister of India, Arjun Ram Meghwal, informed the
Rajya Sabha that the number of cases pending in Indian courts has crossed the
mark of 5 crore. These cases are pending in the Supreme Court of India, 25
high courts and subordinate courts. There could be numerous reasons for the
pendency of these cases, such as lack of infrastructure, procedural delays,
inadequate legal aid, vacations and holidays, an insufficient number of judges,
a delay in the appointment of judges, and a lot more. On the other hand, the
accused also has to face criticism from society along with the harsh behaviour
of the officials, even if he is innocent until he is declared so by the court. So to
deal with all these problems, the lawmakers of India added a special chapter in
the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, under the heading of ‘plea
bargaining’. It is not a new concept; already, there are around 90 countries in
whose legal systems there is a provision for this concept.
 WHAT IS PLEA BARGAINING
• By breaking this term into two parts, we can more easily understand the meaning
of the term plea bargaining. In the context of this concept, the word ‘plea’ means
“request” and the word ‘bargaining’ means “negotiation”. So, in simple terms, it
means a process under which a person who is charged with a criminal offence
negotiates with the prosecution for a lesser punishment than what is provided in
law by pleading guilty to a less serious offence. It is based on the principle of ‘Nolo
Contendere’, literally meaning ‘I do not wish to contend’.
• This explanation contains in itself various elements, like, firstly, that this concept
can only be used in the case of a criminal offence. In civil cases, the victim cannot
make use of this tool. Secondly, the accused or defendant in this concept negotiates
with the prosecutor. Thirdly, here both parties make an agreement where the
defendant promises that he will plead his guilt in front of the court, and in return,
the prosecutor makes some concessions in his punishment and lessens his
punishment to some extent. One thing that is to be noted is that in all this process,
there is no active role for the judge. He only has a supervisory role to play.
 HISTORY OF PLEA BARGAING IN INIDA
• India did not feel the need for plea bargaining due to the presence of the jury system until
the 1960s, when legal representation was permitted.
• Then, in the year 1991, the 142nd report of the Law Commission of India was released,
which mooted the idea of ‘concessional treatment’ of those who plead guilty on their own
volition but was careful to underscore that it would not involve any plea bargaining or
“haggling” with the prosecution. It made its recommendation based on the efficacy of the
American model. The report further stated that such a practice is consistent with both the
Constitution and the Fairness Principles. It further addressed coherent contentions and
further conducted a survey, which established that the majority of the legal community was
in favour of such practice.
• The Law Commission, in its subsequent reports as well, underscored the need for such a
practice. In its 154th report in 1996, it called for having a remedial measure for the timely
disposal of trials for the betterment of under-trial prisoners.
• Then in 2001, in its 177th report, the need for the concept of plea bargaining was
reiterated. And in 2003, the Justice Malimath Committee suggested reforms to the criminal
justice system and endorsed various recommendations of the Law Commission with regard
to plea bargaining.
 EXCEPTIONS TO PLEA
BARGAINING
• Offences that are punishable with death, imprisonment of life, a term
exceeding 7 years of imprisonment,
• Offences against women (like stalking or rape),
• Offences against children under the age of 14
• Offences that affect the socio-economic condition of a country (like food
adulteration or money laundering)
• Apart from this, where the court finds that a person has been convicted under
the same offence previously or that he (accused) has involuntarily filed the
application under this concept, the court can proceed further in accordance
with the law from the stage where such an application has been filed.
EXAMPLES OF PLEA BARGAINING
• Reduction of charges
• In some cases, a defendant may decide to plead guilty to a charge that is less
severe than the original accusation in order to receive a more lenient punishment.
For instance, someone who has been charged with aggravated assault might
choose to plead guilty to simple assault in exchange for a reduced sentence.
• Dismissal of charges
• A defendant may choose to plead guilty to a lesser offence or accept a reduced
sentence in return for the dismissal of certain charges. For instance, someone
accused of multiple counts of theft might plead guilty to only one count and have
the remaining charges dismissed as part of a negotiated agreement for a shorter
sentence.
• Recommendation for a specific sentence
• If the defendant pleads guilty, the prosecution has the discretion to suggest a
specific sentence. For instance, in a case involving embezzlement charges, the
defendant may opt to plead guilty and, as a result, be granted probation on the
condition of making complete restitution.
TYPES OF PLEA BARGAINING
• There are numerous forms of plea bargaining, and each of its forms has its nuances, which
can be employed depending on the circumstances of each case. A few of them are as
follows:
• Charge bargaining: This is the form of bargaining in which the defendant agrees to
plead guilty to the offence in exchange for a lesser serious charge than the one initially
filed by the prosecution, in which there were much more serious charges. This kind of
bargaining is permissible in cases where the maximum punishment is imprisonment for
seven years or less.
• Sentence bargaining: In this form of bargaining, the defendant or the accused agrees to
plead guilty to the offence on the original charges filed by the prosecution in expectation
of receiving a lesser sentence than they might receive if convicted at the trial.
• Fact bargaining: This form of bargaining is generally not favored by the courts, as it is
considered to be against the criminal justice system. It involves an agreement between the
defendant and the prosecution where they both agree on specific facts or evidence that
will be presented or omitted at the trial. This way, only a particular set of facts is
presented to the court. This could affect the strength of the case, and there are chances
that a more favorable outcome would come in favour of the defendant.
 PLEA BARGAIN IN INDIA
• In Mumbai's first case, an application for plea bargaining was made
before a sessions court when an ex-Reserve Bank of India clerk, accused
in a cheating case, moved the court seeking lesser punishment in return
for confessing to the crime. Based on submissions of CBI, the court
rejected Bandekar's application.
• In Pardeep Gupta v. State, Honourable Judge observed that "The trial
court's rejection of the plea bargain shows that the learned trial court
had not bothered to look into the provisions of chapter XXI A of Code of
Criminal Procedure meant for the purpose of plea bargaining. The High
Court directed the trial court to reconsider the application of plea
bargaining made by the accused
 CRITISIM OF PLEA
BARGAINING
• major argument against Plea Bargaining is that it is detrimental to
the innocent defendant undermining the public image of the criminal
justice system representing a system which sacrifices proper
punishment of criminals in the name of judicial efficiency.
• Another observation of critics is that most guilty pleas are not as a
result of genuine repentance and defendants pretend repentance to
earn sentence reductions.* Some other drawbacks of the concept of
plea bargaining as mentioned by critics are unjust sentencing or
disparity in sentencing and a general attitude of leniency of the court
in pronouncing the punishment
 CONCLUSION
• Plea bargaining has a vital role as well as a valuable tool in the Indian
criminal justice system. It serves as a means of negotiation between the
prosecution and the accused, allowing for the possibility of a mutually
beneficial agreement that presents an alternative resolution to criminal
cases, promotes efficiency in the courts, and preserves judicial
resources. Plea bargaining can help expedite the legal process and
provide a fair and efficient resolution to criminal matters. However, it is
also essential for the judges also to exercise their discretion judiciously
and wisely when approving plea bargains, taking note of the gravity and
seriousness of the offence, the interests and needs of the victim, and the
impact on the administration of justice.