1999 (10) TMI 757 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Validity of plea bargaining in criminal cases
- Applicability of negotiated settlement in criminal cases
- Role of the Court in sentencing based on plea bargaining

Issue 1: Validity of plea bargaining in criminal cases
The Supreme Court analyzed the judgment and order passed by the High Court, which accepted a plea bargain and maintained the conviction of the respondent under Section 304 part I, I.P.C. The Court noted that the concept of 'plea bargaining' is not recognized and is against public policy under the criminal justice system in India. The Court referred to Section 320 Cr. P.C., which allows compounding of certain offenses with the permission of the Court but does not permit negotiated settlements in criminal cases. The Court strongly disapproved of the practice of plea bargaining, emphasizing that the short-circuiting of the criminal justice process by avoiding evidence and deciding cases based on guilty pleas is not acceptable.

Issue 2: Applicability of negotiated settlement in criminal cases
The Court cited previous judgments to support its stance against plea bargaining. In the case of Madanlal Ram Chandra Daga v. State of Maharashtra, the Court held that courts should not enter into bargains where money is recovered for the complainant through their agency. Similarly, in Murlidhar Meghraj Loya v. State of Maharashtra, the Court disapproved of practices like plea bargaining, highlighting the negative impact on the justice system. The Court emphasized that negotiated settlements in criminal cases are not permissible in the Indian legal framework, as they undermine the principles of justice and fairness.

Issue 3: Role of the Court in sentencing based on plea bargaining
The Supreme Court reiterated that courts cannot dispose of criminal cases based on plea bargaining. The Court emphasized that if an accused confesses guilt, the appropriate sentence must be imposed based on the merits of the case. The Court clarified that the approach in appeals or revisions should focus on determining the guilt of the accused based on the evidence on record. The Court highlighted that the acceptance or admission of guilt should not automatically lead to a reduction in sentence, and accused individuals cannot bargain with the Court for leniency based on pleading guilty. The Court concluded by setting aside the High Court's order and directing a fresh decision on the appeals in accordance with the law, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the evidence and appropriate sentencing based on the merits of the case.