Plea Bargaining - A Comparative Study of India with Foreign Countries

Abstract

Plea bargaining has become more popular as a way to resolve court issues around the world. The application, scope, and operation of plea bargains change significantly between the common law and civil law regimes. To analyze these differences with respect to different jurisdictions, a comparison between India and the United States has been conducted in this study. The relative advantages and disadvantages of plea bargaining are still debated. This is because some argue that plea bargains call into question the primary purpose "of a trial, i.e." to establish the truth and dispense justice. There is no denying that India needs a framework for speedy administration of justice. India's courts are being battered by rising criminal cases. Prisons are now overflowing with inmates being held without trial due to continuous delays in case disposal. This research uses normative law that examines document studies, namely using various secondary data such as laws and regulations, court decisions, legal theories, and can be in the form of scholars' opinions. This type of normative research uses qualitative analysis, namely by explaining existing data with words or statements not with numbers.The results show that India developed plea bargaining as a response to the deplorable status of the justice system. It is recognized as a credible strategy to resolve open cases and expedite the criminal justice system. However, despite being conceptualized for many years, the Indian criminal justice system has yet to adopt plea bargaining. The researcher attempts to ascertain whether plea bargaining in India in its current form and structure is adequate to achieve these goals by weighing its advantages and disadvantages in the context of the Indian justice system.