1. Presented By- Absar Aftab Absar

2. introduction
Introduced after the amendment Act of 2005 in Code of Criminal
Procedure.
Came into effect on July 5,2006.
Pre-trial negotiation between Defendant and Prosecution.
Accused pleads guilty in return for certain concessions promised by
the Prosecutor- usually to drop or reduce some charges.
It is introduced in response to the delay in the disposal of criminal
cases.

3. Historical Background (Global)
Was used in America in the 19th Century.
In the year 1969, James Earl Ray pleaded guilty to assassinating
Martin Luther King, Jr. to avoid execution sentence. He finally got
an imprisonment of 99 years.
In a landmark judgment in , Bordenkircher V. Hayes, the US
Supreme Court held that the constitutional rationale for plea
bargaining is that no element of punishment or retaliation so long
as the accused is free to accept or reject the prosecutions offer.

4. Historical Background (Indian)
In the 12th Law Commission Report the concept behind incorporating Plea
Bargaining was mentioned.
To reduce the delays in the disposal of criminal trials and appeals and also to
alleviate the sufferings of under trials.
The NDA government formed a committee, headed by the former Chief Justice
of the Karnataka and Kerala High Courts, where Justice V. S. Malimath came up
with some suggestions to tackle the ever-growing number of criminal cases.
The Malimath Committee recommended that a system of plea bargaining be
introduced in the Indian Criminal Justice System to facilitate the earlier
disposal of criminal cases and to reduce the burden of the courts.

5. The Early Bias…
In erstwhile cases, the Supreme Court has described plea bargaining
as 'the subrosa ante-room settlement' 'method of short circuiting the
hearing'
It stated that the practice 'would tend to encourage corruption,
collusion.
In, State of Uttar Pradesh v Chandrika {2000 Cr.L.J. 384}
It was observed that the court has to decide on merits. Mere
admission of the guilt must not be a ground for reduction of sentence.

6. Reasons for bringing this concept in India
Speedy disposal of criminal cases
i.e. reduction in heavy backlogs.
Less time consuming.
End of uncertainty of a case.
Saving legal expenses of both the
parties i.e. accused and state.
Less congestion in jails.

7. Contd…
Under present system, 75% to 90% of the
criminal cases results in acquittal, in this
situation it is preferable to introduce this
concept in India.
It is not fair to keep the accused with hard-
core criminals .

8. Indian Model of Plea Bargaining
Accused initiates the proceedings.
Offence not punishable with maximum seven years
of imprisonment.
Application filed by accused in the court where
trial is pending.
Court examines the accused in camera.

9. Contd…
Court has to satisfy itself that filing of
application is voluntary.
Court is responsible whether the application
is voluntary and with free consent of accused.
Time is provided by the Court to work out a
satisfactory disposition of case.

10. Contd…
Court is bound to dispose of the case after
awarding compensation as per the settlement.
Quantum of punishment to be decided after
hearing concerned parties.
It may range from one-fourth to one – half of
the prescribed punishment for that offence.

11. Contd…
Law makes it mandatory to pronounce
Judgment in a open Court.
The statements in application made by accused
shall not be used for any other purpose.
No appeal to any Court lies against the
judgment.

12. Benefits in respect of Victim
He can easily
get the
compensation.
He can save
himself from
long drawn
Judicial
Process.
Less time
and money
consuming.

13. Benefits in respect of Accused
In case of
Minimum
Punishment, he
will get half
punishment.
If no such
punishment is
provided, then
he will get one
fourth of the
punishment
provided.
He may release
on probation or
admonition.
He may get the
gain of period
already
undergone in
custody under
section 428 of
Cr.P.C.

14. Contd…
No appeal lies
against the
judgment in favour
of him.
Admission of
accused cannot be
used for any other
purposes except for
Plea-bargaining.
Less time and
money consuming.

15. Cannot be invoked
Punishment of offence more than seven years and/or it
affects the socio-economic condition of Country( to be
notified by Central Government).
Committed against women or child under fourteen years.
Previously convicted by court in which charged with same
offence.

16. Judicial Pronouncements on Plea Bargaining
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandrika {AIR 2000 (SC)
164, AIR 1999 (SCW) 4251, 2000 CrLJ 384}
In, State of Gujarat v Natwar Harchanji Thakor,
{AIR (2005) Cr. L.J. 2957}
Gujarat High Court in favor of Plea Bargaining
It addressed it as a new dimension to the realm of
Judicial reforms

17. Contd…
SC examined the concept in,
Murlidhar Meghraj Loyat v State of Maharashtra
{AIR1976SC1929, 1976CriLJ1527} and Kasambhai v
State of Gujarat {AIR1980SC854, 1980CriLJ553}.
In the latter case SC resisted a plea of guilt based on
Plea Bargaining as it would oppose Public policy.

18. Contd…
In, Kachhia Patel Shantilal Koderlal vs
State of Gujarat and Anr.
The Court held that plea bargaining is
unconstitutional and illegal and would
subvert the process of law and frustrate
social objective.

19. Advantages of Plea Bargaining
Manages case load.
Reduces work load of Prosecutors and
giving them time to prepare for grave cases.
No time and money consuming trial,
accused just submits before law.

20. Contd…
The prosecution has chance to find accused as
guilty by co-operating with him in plea
bargaining, which is not possible if prosecution
is weak.
Prosecutor may agree for a plea bargaining of
an insignificant accused to collect evidence
against other graver accused.

21. Contd…
Gives relief to victim also as he can
avoid lengthy court procedure.
Beneficial for under trials too as it
helps reducing long pendency in
court.

22. Disadvantages…
For accused there is every chance of being practically coerced.
Plea Bargaining undercuts the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
That plea negotiation is substantially more likely than trial to result in the
conviction of innocent.
It is to show leniency towards offenders.
Prosecutors can be influenced by the equities of individual cases, the seriousness
of the accused’s alleged crime, their prior criminal record, and so on.

23. Contd…
Prosecutors can use plea bargaining to create
seemingly impressive conviction rates.
The personal bias with the defence lawyers also
may influence plea bargaining practices.
The private defense lawyers may sometimes deceive
the client and may pursue for Plea Bargaining.

24. Conclusion….
Law is still in nascent stage. No results as to the efficacy can be drawn
out.
It is a leniency towards the accused.
Only Plea Bargaining cannot solve the backlog of cases.
It can be efficiently used for miscarriage of Justice by Prosecutors as well
as Defense lawyers.
Process is unfair with the innocent.