Plea Bargaining in India Compared With the West
Chapter One Hundred Fourteen
Syllabus topic 4, "Approaches to Sentencing"
Pages 473 to 476 of 806
In one line
India built the most heavily supervised plea bargaining scheme in the common law world, and almost nobody uses it.
The comparison, in one table
Everything a comparative question needs is here.
| United States | England and Wales | India, Chapter XXIII | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the charge negotiable? | Yes, centrally | No | No |
| Who sets the concession? | The parties | A published guideline, sliding by stage | The statute, section 293 |
| The judge | Excluded from discussions | Excluded, save a defence requested indication of the maximum | Convenes and presides over the meeting, section 291 |
| Voluntariness | Tested in a colloquy | Not a bargain, so no issue arises | Tested in camera, section 290(4) |
| Scope by offence | Effectively unlimited | All cases | Nothing above seven years; no socio-economic offence; nothing against a woman or a child |
| Who may start it | Prosecutor or defence | The defendant's plea | The accused only, section 290(1) |
| Time limit | None | Discount falls with delay | Thirty days from the framing of charge |
| The victim | Not a party | Not a party | A participant, and paid first, section 293(a) |
| Plea maintaining innocence | Permitted | Not permitted | No provision |
| Appeal | On the plea's validity | Ordinary appeal against sentence | Final, save Article 136 and Articles 226 and 227 |
| Probation as an outcome | Not part of the scheme | Available as a sentence | Expressly first in order, section 293(b) |
What India got right
Four things, and they are direct answers to the pre-2005 judgments.
The judge is inside the process, not around it. Kasambhai condemned a bargain struck between prosecution, defence and magistrate behind the case. Section 291 makes the court convene the meeting and puts it under a duty to ensure that the process is completed voluntarily, and section 292 requires a report signed by everyone present. What was a secret understanding is now a recorded proceeding.
The discount is fixed by law, not bought. Murlidhar Meghraj Loya objected that a negotiated sentence defeats the minimum the legislature has fixed. Section 293 answers it by legislating the discount itself: half or one fourth of a minimum, one fourth or one sixth of the punishment. The legislature, not the parties, decides how much a plea is worth.
The victim is in the room. Section 291 gives the victim notice to participate in both police report and complaint cases. Section 290(4)(a) contemplates compensation and expenses as part of the disposition. Section 293(a) requires the court to award the compensation first and only then hear the parties on punishment. No other system in the table does this, and it is the single strongest thing an Indian answer can say.
And the application is safe to make. Section 299 forbids the use of anything the accused said in his application for any other purpose, and a failed application simply returns the case to the stage at which it was filed.
The rest of this chapter
Module one is free. The rest of this chapter comes with the LL.M. Criminal Law and Criminal Administration Semester 3 notes.
You are reading a chapter from a later module. Everything in module one of every subject stays free, and so does every question paper and the syllabus.
Notes + Solved papers: ₹798 Already bought it? Sign in
Or notes only: ₹499
Or solved papers only: ₹499
Free either way: question papers, the syllabus, and module one of every subject.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.