Plea Bargaining

09BAL014

Plea Bargaining –A comparative analysis Between United States and India

PROJECT FOR THE SUBJECT  Comparative Criminal Procedure

 SUBMITTED BY   Sarita aur   Roll !o"#$B%&#'(  Seme)ter * I+   B"%"&&"B" ,Hon)"-

UN!" #$! %UIAN&! '(  Mr"S ushant ushant Rochlani   %))t" Pro."/ I&!U 

 Su0mitted to  I!STITUTE OF &%1  &%1   !IRM% U!I2ERSITY/ U!I2ERSITY/ %HMED%B%D

1

&)apter 1 Introd*ction 1+1 Introd*ction,-

In modern times, plea bargaining has become the primary procedure through which vast  proportion of cases can be disposed off. It is a non- trial mode of procedure. Plead Guilty and ensure Lesser Sentence” is the shortest possible meaning of Plea argaining. It can be also be defined as pre-trial negotiations between the accused and the  prosecution during which the accused agrees to plead guilty in e!change for certain concessions by the prosecution. Plea argaining can be defined as "Pre-#rial negotiations between the accused and the prosecution during which the accused agrees to plead guilty in e!change for certain concessions by the prosecution”. It gives criminal defendants the opportunity to avoid sitting through a trial ris$ing and conviction on the original more serious charge. %or e!ample, a criminal defendant charged with a theft charge, the conviction of which would re&uire imprisonment in state prison, may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to a theft charge, which may not carry 'ail time. Plea argaining can be of two types()vi*. +harge argaining and Sentence bargaining .

Plea bargaining is a significant part of criminal 'ustice in the nited States as roughly / of criminal cases are settled through the method rather than by a 'ury trial. Plea bargains in the S are sub'ect to the approval of the court and different states and  'urisdiction have different rules. 0n account of its efficiency, plea bargaining has won the endorsement of the Supreme +ourt as 1an essential component of the administration of   'ustice12 In the case of Santobello v. 3ew 4or$, +hief 5ustice urger e!plained there that  plea bargaining 1is to be encouraged1 because 1if every criminal charge were sub'ected to 1 http)66legalservices.co.in6blogs6entry6Plea-argaining-7n-Indian-7pproach

2 Santobello v. 3ew 4or$, 88 .S. 29:, 2;, (:(

2

a full-scale trial, the States and the %ederal Government would need to multiply by many times the number of 'udges and court facilities.1 In India the (98th as an alternative method to deal with huge arrears of  criminal cases, the recommendation of the Law +ommittee finally found a support in ?alimath +ommittee