英语论文网

a plea bargain. [6]

The situation in India has been slightly different with ADR mechanisms in varying forms such as ‘Caste Panchayats’, ‘Village Panchayats’, ‘Nyaya Panchayats’ and ‘Lok Adalats’ dealing with both civil as well criminal matters. In tune with long tradition of traditional indigenous dispute settlement mechanisms the Central Government took steps to formally introduce the ADR processes within the criminal justice system by amending the National Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 thereby providing for the establishment of ‘Permanent Lok Adalats.’ [7] The next step that followed was the introduction of plea bargaining in India through the criminal law (Amendment) Act, 2005 passed in the winter session of the Parliament embodied in the Chapter XXIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with effect from July 5th 2006. [8]

This despite the Supreme Court’s initial reluctance to formally recognize the concept of plea bargaining was evident from some of its decisions in cases such as Kasam Bhai v. State of Gujarat [9] wherein it observed that a conviction based on plea bargaining is opposed to public policy as it induces the accused to confess on the allurement given to him that if he enters a plea of guilty he will be left off very lightly. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandrika [10] , it held that: “The concept of 'plea bargaining' is not recognised and is against public policy under our criminal justice system… this method of short circuiting the hearing and deciding the criminal appeals or cases involving serious offences requires no encouragement.” This initial reluctance has clearly been overshadowed by later developments especially with regard the increasing case burden consequently affecting the quality of justice rendered in terms of numerous hardships faced by the under trial prisoners.

The chapter on plea bargaining seems to have been largely influenced by the American experience with the belief that it can be made an essential component of administration of criminal justice provided it is properly administered. [11] Despite the raging debates about the appropriateness of plea bargains this system has become a norm rather than an exception in the United States after their Apex Court in Brady v. US [12] upheld its constitutionality. [13] Certain departures from the American model have, however, been made while implementing the plea bargaining system within our country, the specifics of which shall be brought out later.

The paper shall aim to look into the aspect of plea bargaining as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism within the criminal law system. The paper shall look into this concept as has been introduced by Chapter XXIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The various differences between the American System shall be brought out briefly. The various tools of alternative dispute resolution such as negotiation and mediation shall be looked at in light of the concept of plea bargaining.

Chapter 1

Chapter XXIA of the Code of criminal procedure, 1973

Article 21 of our Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. [14] Post Maneka Gandhi [15] this article has been given a very wide import thereby becoming the source of many substantive rights and procedural safeguards of the people. In consonance with this 本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。