Concept of Plea Bargaining- Application and its Procedure
The apex court in various judicial decisions has held right to fair trial as integral right enriched under the Article 21 of the Indian constitution. In the accusatorial method, the general principle of burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Our courts have recognized that the primary object of criminal procedure is to ensure a fair trial of accused person. But sometimes in case petty offences which are not heinous in nature trial procedure may be looks like a hectic procedure. It may be possible that in these types of offences the accused may plead guilty on the very inception of trial. In this case if the accused do not get the opportunity to plead guilty with some lesser punishment then it may cause injustice to him. The essential objective of the criminal law is to protect society against criminals and lawbreakers.
The famous saying “Justice delayed is justice denied” holds utmost significance when the concept of Plea bargaining is discussed. The number of cases pending in the courts is shocking but at the same time, it has been normalized by people. These astonishing figures are no more astonishing because people have started accepting this as their fate. The concept of plea bargaining was not there in criminal law since its inception. Considering this scenario, Indian Legal scholars and Jurists incorporated this concept in Indian Criminal Law. As the term itself suggests that it is an agreement between accused and the prosecutor. Many countries have accepted this concept in their Criminal Justice System (CJS).
The concept of plea bargaining is based on the principle of “plead guilty and bargain lesser sentence”. It is based on a latin maxim “nolo contendere” means ‘I do not wish to contend’. Plea bargaining can be defined as pre-trial negotiations between thee accused and the prosecution during which the accused agrees to plead guilty in exchange for certain concessions by the prosecution.
Earlier the criminal jurisprudence in India did not recognize the concept of plea bargaining as such. However, reference may be made to section 206(1) of criminal procedure code and section 208(1) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. These provisions enable the accused to plead guilty for petty offences and to pay small fines whereupon the case is closed.
The Law Commission of India advocated introduction of ‘Plea Bargaining’ in the 142nd, 154th and 177th report. The law commission noted that the experience of United States as an evidence of plea bargaining being a means for the disposal of accumulated cases and expediting the delivery of criminal justice. Based on the recommendation of law Commission, the new chapter on the plea bargaining in cases of offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years has been included in CR.P.C and th some has come into effect from 05.07.2006.
Plea bargaining has two distinct categories i.e. Charge Bargaining and Sentence Bargaining. Charge bargaining refers to a promise by the prosecutor to reduce or dismiss some of the charges brought against the defendant in exchange of guilty plea. Sentence bargaining refers to a promise by the prosecutor to recommend a specific sentence or to refrain from making any sentence recommendation in exchange for a guilty plea.
Procedure of Plea Bargaining
Sections 265A to 265L are incorporated in the Code of Criminal Procedure by Amendment Act with effect from 5th of July, 2006 to give effect to the system of “Plea Bargaining”.
The accused is entitled to avail the benefit of “plea bargaining” both in the cases instituted on the police report as well as by way of a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C.
The benefit of “plea bargaining” is available to the accused that is not guilty of committing an offence punishable by death or life sentence and not exceeding seven The benefit also does not apply if the crime affects the socio-economic conditions of the society and also to the crimes committed against woman or child below the age of 14 years. Plea bargaining is not applicable to juvenile offenders.
Ø The accused should make an application. The court should conduct in camera inquiry to ascertain that the application is voluntary and without duress. The Court should notify the public prosecutor and the victim to arrive at final disposition.
Ø On the admission of guilt, the Court should impose One-Fourth of the sentence prescribed for the offence. In case the offence is punishable for minimum imprisonment half of such imprisonment is to be imposed. In both the situations, the Court can award compensation to the victim after productive negotiations with the accused and the victim.
Ø The accused is entitled to the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, the benefit of let off under section 428 Cr.P.C. and benefit of bail.
Ø The accused convicted in the system of a plea of bargaining has no right of appeal, but the remedy of writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 and Special Leave Petition under Article 136[9] of the Constitution of India is not barred.
Plea Bargaining and Judicial Pronouncements
In Murlidhar Meghraj Loya vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 1976 SC 1929), The Hon’ble Supreme Court criticized the concept of Plea Bargaining and said that it intrudes upon the society’s interests.
In Kasambhai vs State of Gujarat (1980 AIR 854) & Kachhia Patel Shantilal Koderlal vs State of Gujarat and Anr, the Apex court said that the Plea Bargaining is against public policy. Moreover, it regretted the fact that the magistrate accepted the plea bargaining of accused. Furthermore, Hon’ble Court described this concept as a highly reprehensible practice.
The Court also held that practice of plea bargaining as illegal and unconstitutional and tends to encourage the corruption, collusion and pollute the pure fount of justice.
Thippaswamy vs State of Karnataka, [1983] 1 SCC 194, the Court said that inducing or leading an accused to plead guilty under a promise or assurance would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court also stated that “In such cases, the Court of appeal or revision should set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused and remand the case to the trial court so that the accused can, if he so wishes defend himself against the charge and if he is found guilty, proper sentence can be passed against him”.
In State of Uttar Pradesh vs Chandrika 2000 Cr.L.J. 384(386), the Apex Court disparaged the concept of plea bargaining and held this practice as unconstitutional and illegal. Here the Hon’ble Court was of the view that on the plea bargaining Court cannot basis of disposing of criminal cases. The case has to be decided on the merit. In furtherance of the same, court said that if the accused confesses his guilt, he must be given the appropriate sentence as required by the law.
In the State Of Gujarat vs Natwar Harchandji Thakor (2005) 1 GLR 709, the Court acknowledged the importance of plea bargaining and said that every “plea of guilty” which is construed to be a part of the statutory process in the criminal trial, should not be understood as a “plea bargaining” ipso facto. It is a matter of matter and has to be decided on a case to case basis. Considering the dynamic nature of law and society, the court said that the very object of the law is to provide an easy, cheap and expeditious justice by resolving disputes.
Conclusion – Final Remarks
Plea bargaining is undoubted, a disputed concept. Few people have welcomed it while others have abandoned it. It is true that plea bargaining speeds up caseload disposition. The criminal courts are too overburdened to allow each case to go to trial. In such situation, the system is left with no other choice but to adopt this technique.