PLEA BARGAINING BY - ROHIT KUMAR
PLEA BARGAINING
AUTHORED
BY - ROHIT KUMAR
BA.LLB(H)
Amity
law School, Patna.
Introduction-
It is the practice
of negotiating an agreement between the prosecution and the defense 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 a pretrial negotiation
between the accused and the prosecution where the accused agrees to plead
guilty in exchange for certain concessions by the prosecution. It is a bargain
where a defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge and the prosecutors in
return drop more serious charges. It is not available for all types of
crime e.g. a person cannot claim plea bargaining after committing
heinous crimes or for the crimes which are punishable with death or life
imprisonment.
HISTORY OF PLEA BARGAINING
In the jury system,
the need to plea bargaining was not felt as there was no legal representation.
Later, in 1960 legal representation was allowed and the need for Plea
bargaining was felt. However, the concept of Plea bargaining has traces of its
origins in American legal history. This concept has been used since the 19th
century. The judges used this bargaining to encourage confession.
PLEA BARGAINING IN INDIA
Plea Bargaining is
not an indigenous concept of Indian legal system. It is a part of the recent
development of Indian Criminal Justice System (ICJS). It was inculcated in
Indian Criminal Justice System after considering the burden of long-standing
cases on the Judiciary.
Two Kind Of Plea
Bargaining.
Two categories of
plea bargaining are there: one is charge bargaining and the other is sentence
bargaining.
In charge
bargaining the accused pleads guilty in exchange of a promise by the
prosecutor either to reduce the charge to a less intensive one or to dismiss
some of the multiple charges.
In sentence
bargaining, the accused pleads guilty in exchange of a promise by the
prosecutor to recommend a lighter sentence.
Who can apply for plea bargaining?
Two kinds of accused
persons can apply for plea bargaining: one is the accused against whom police
report has been forwarded by the officer in charge of the police station
alleging the offence, and the other is the accused against whom a Magistrate
has taken cognizance of an offence. But a plea bargaining is not applicable to
any juvenile or child. An accused person satisfying the above conditions can
file an application for plea bargaining in the court where such an offence is
pending for trial.
Where plea bargaining not applicable
Plea bargaining is
not available to an accused who has been charged with an offence punishable
with death, life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term exceeding 7 years.
Similarly, plea
bargaining is not permissible if the offence is against a woman or a child of
less than 14 years of age.
Plea bargaining is
impermissible, if the offence affects the socio economic condition of the
country.
Favour Arguments for Plea Bargaining in India
Fast disposal of cases
The plea
bargaining is beneficial for both the prosecution and the defense because there
is no risk of complete loss at trial. It helps the attorneys to defend their
clients in an easy way because both the parties possess bargaining power. This
is how the long-standing disputes can be resolved and the court would also not
need to face encumbrance of case files. Moreover, Plea bargaining helps the
courts in preserving scarce resources for the cases that need them most.
Less serious offenses on one’s
record
In
a country like India, society plays a vital role. Once a person is
stigmatized by society it becomes very difficult for that person to survive.
Many a time stigmatization leads to ostracization. In such scenario, Plea
Bargaining allows a person to plead guilty or no contest in exchange for a
reduction in the number of charges or the seriousness of the offenses. This
results in recording less serious offenses on the official court records of an
accused. This can be good for the accused when he is convicted in the future.
It avoids publicity
Moreover,
Plea Bargaining is also a good mechanism to avoid publicity because the longer
the case goes the more publicity the accuses gets. Therefore plea bargaining
avoids such publicity by a fast settlement of the case. Famous and
ordinary People who depend on their reputation in the community for their
living, and those people who want to escape any unnecessary stigmatization.
Although the news of the plea itself may be public yet it stays only for a
short time when compared to news of a trial.
Arguments against Plea Bargaining in India
Voluntarily
adopted Mechanism
As per the
legal provision dealing with Plea bargaining, it is a voluntary mechanism which
is only entertained when accused opts it willingly. But the law is silent on
the point that in case, the settlement reached is contrary to the purpose of
the legal system.
Involvement
of Police
The
Involvement of the police in plea bargaining also attracts criticism. As India
is infamous for the custodial torture by police. In such scenario, the concept
of Plea Bargaining is more likely to aggravate the situation.
Corruption
The role of
victims in plea bargaining process is also not appreciated. The role of victim
in this process would attract corruption which is ultimately defeating the
purpose which is sought to be achieved by such action.
Landmark judgments:
1. Murlidhar
Meghraj Loya v. State of Maharashtra (2010): In this case, the
Supreme Court of India recognized the concept of plea bargaining as a statutory
right under Section 265-A to 265-L of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The court emphasized it’s importance in reducing the burden on the courts and
promoting efficient case disposal.Seehttps://indiankanoon.org/doc/739213/.
2.
State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat (2014):
In this case, the Supreme Court clarified the scope and applicability of it’s
provisions in India. The court held that the purpose of Plea bargaining is to
ensure a fair and speedy trial, and it should be applied to eligible cases
based on the specific circumstances and facts of each case.
3.
Subhash Popatlal Dave v. State of Gujarat (2014):
In this case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the constitutional validity of plea
bargaining and emphasized that it should be conducted voluntarily and based on
a full understanding of the consequences by the accused. The court highlighted
that it is an important tool for reducing the backlog of cases and promoting
efficient justice delivery.
4.
Sukesh Behl v. Union of India (2018):
In this case, the Delhi High Court observed that plea bargaining is an
essential mechanism to expedite the disposal of cases and provide an
opportunity to the accused to avoid lengthy trials. The court emphasized the
need for effective implementation of its provisions and directed the government
to take steps to promote awareness about it among stakeholders.
5.
Ajay Kumar v. State of Punjab (2018):
In this case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court highlighted the importance of
plea bargaining in addressing the issue of overburdened courts and lengthy
trials. The court emphasized that it is a valuable tool for achieving speedy
justice and encouraged the use of plea-bargaining provisions wherever
appropriate.
Conclusion
While plea bargaining offers advantages, it should
be conducted in a fair and transparent
manner, with adequate safeguards to protect the rights of the accused
and ensure that the plea is voluntary and informed. The court’s oversight and
adherence to due process are crucial to maintain the integrity of the
plea-bargaining process in India.