PLEA BARGAINING: JUSTICE OR EXPEDIENCE?
Plea bargaining allows an accused to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence. While it aims to expedite case disposal, its implications on justice remain contentious.
It was earlier defined under Section 265A CrPC, which has now been replaced by the Section-293 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, plea bargaining is permissible for offenses where the maximum punishment does not exceed seven years, excluding crimes affecting the nation’s socio-economic conditions or those committed against women or children under 14 years. The process involves the accused voluntarily applying, the court ensuring the plea’s voluntariness, and, if accepted, sentencing the accused to a reduced term.
The Supreme Court of India has addressed plea bargaining in several judgments:
Kachhia Patel Shantilal Koderlal v. State of Gujarat (1980): The Court held that plea bargaining is unconstitutional, illegal, and could encourage corruption and collusion.
State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat (2014): The Court clarified that plea bargaining should be applied to eligible cases based on specific circumstances.
Recent Developments
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which replaces the CrPC, introduces leniency for first-time offenders. Section 293 BNSS allows such offenders to be punished with one-fourth to one-sixth of the minimum punishment, compared to one-half and one-fourth under the CrPC.
Contributed by- Ridhima Manchanda