Open Access Research Article

BALANCING SPEEDY TRIAL AND VICTIM PSYCHOLOGY UNDER INDIA’S PLEA-BARGAINING PROVISIONS

Author(s):
SEREENA C.S. NIVEDITA RAJEEV
Journal IJLRA
ISSN 2582-6433
Access Open Access
Volume 3
Issue 7
Download PDF Open PDF Citation Search Scholar

Abstract

The Indian Criminal justice system has redefined the role and relevance of victims from that of mere spectators to one of active participants through the introduction of victim-centric provisions like victim appeal and victim compensation.  In the transformation from a system of retributive to reformative justice, these provisions were originally designed to ensure that the rights of victims are not lost in the process. One of the major developments in this aspect was that of Plea Bargaining, discussed in Chapter XXIII of BNSS (corresponding to Chapter XXIA of CrPC) This paper examines whether Plea Bargaining acts solely as a tool for the reduction of the backlog of cases, resulting in justice being sold, or whether justice is really heard through the effective participation of victims in the procedure. Comparative and doctrinal analysis of plea-bargaining provisions has been evaluated in this study to showcase the shift in Indian jurisprudence from initial judicial skepticism to victim-centric restorative justice. The recommendations of the Malimath Committee, along with Law Commission Reports (142,154, and 177), are detailed to introspect its role in the statutory incorporation of Mutually Satisfactory Disposition. The study reveals that even though plea bargaining reduces the backlog of cases to a limited extent, the process ultimately focuses on monetary settlement, often ignoring the post-negotiation psychological aspects of the victim. A significant finding of this study is the absence of a support system like a Victim-Witness Coordinator in the USA under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), 2004, who assists the victims to overcome the post-bargaining trauma and ensures essential psychological services are made available. In contrast, the Indian legal system conveniently assumes that financial restitution automatically heals the emotional wound. Finally, the research also recognizes the presence of safety valves in the form of Writ Jurisdiction and Special Leave Petitions, thereby converting the bar on regular appeals from absolute to restrictive, ensuring speedy justice does not override substantive justice under provisions of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This paper contributes to the discussion of restorative justice under the plea-bargaining provisions in Indian Statutes, while addressing the non-existence of a Victim Wellness Cell after bargaining. In essence, this paper highlights the need to balance both psychological and monetary aspects to ensure that a victim-centric approach in plea bargaining is effectively implemented.

Published Paper

PDF Preview
Download Open

Author Details

Authors: SEREENA C.S., NIVEDITA RAJEEVRegistration ID: 1013465 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA13465 & IJLRA13466Approved ISSN: 2582-6433 | Country: Delhi, IndiaPage No.: 2474-2487

Article Information

BALANCING SPEEDY TRIAL AND VICTIM PSYCHOLOGY UNDER INDIA’S PLEA-BARGAINING PROVISIONS

Authors: SEREENA C.S., NIVEDITA RAJEEV

  • Journal IJLRA
  • ISSN 2582-6433
  • Volume 3
  • Issue 7
Citation Download Paper Full Details Search on Google Search on Google Scholar

About Journal

International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis

  • AbbreviationIJLRA
  • ISSN2582-6433
  • AccessOpen Access
  • LicenseCC 4.0

All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.

Creative Commons

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.

Current Issue

Ethics and Policy

For Authors