Justice ought to not exclusively be done however without a doubt it ought to be believed to be done and it is guaranteed by speedy justice or convenient judgment. The right to a speedy trial has been ensured by the Indian Constitution as a crucial right under Article 21. However, it stays just in the paper as in real Indian Judiciary is delayed in conveying justice. In India, the circumstance isn't acceptable concerning the criminal justice system (CJS).

This issue of the excess of cases has been perceived by the governing body and it presented the idea of plea Bargaining by way of Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 to take care of the issue of accumulating of the case and a lower rate of convictions in Indian Court. The idea of plea bargaining was not there in criminal law since its initiation. Thinking about this situation, Indian Legal researchers and Jurists consolidated this idea in Indian Criminal Law. As the term itself suggests that it is an understanding between the defendant and the plaintiff. Numerous nations have acknowledged this idea in their Criminal Justice System (CJS).

Concept of Plea Bargaining

It is inappropriate to assume that the idea of plea Bargaining was discovered in recent times. It is utilized in the American Judiciary in the nineteenth century itself. The bill of Rights makes no notice of the training while building up the fair trial principle in the 6th amendment however the lawfulness of the plea Bargaining had continually been maintained there.

In the year 1969, James Earl Ray conceded to killing Martin Luthar King, Jr. to maintain a strategic distance from execution sentence. He, at last, got detainment of 99 years. More than 90 percent of the criminal cases in America are rarely attempted. The dominant parts of the people who are blamed for wrongdoing surrender their protected rights and confess. Consistently, a criminal case is discarded in an American Court by the method of a guilty plea or Nolo Contendera Plea.

Black's Law Dictionary defines the term Plea Bargaining� as:
The procedure whereby the denounced and the examiner in a criminal case work out a commonly acceptable mien of the case subject to the Court endorsement. It ordinarily includes the denounced conceding to a lesser offense or to just one or a portion of the courts of a multi-include arraignment as a byproduct of a lighter than that workable for the graver charge.

Plea Bargaining is a pretrial arrangement between the charged and the prosecution where the accused consents to confess in return for specific concessions by the prosecution. It is where a defendant concedes to a lesser charge and the prosecutors consequently drop more serious accusations. It isn't accessible for a wide range of wrongdoing for example an individual can't guarantee plea bargaining in the wake of perpetrating egregious wrongdoings or for the violations which are culpable with death or life detainment.

Plea Bargaining under Criminal Procedure Code

In 1991 the 142nd Report of the Law Commission of India contemplated the problem of presenting supplication haggling in criminal equity just because. Then the 154th Report of the Law Commission of India recommended adopting the policy of plea bargaining for settlement of a huge backlog of cases. At that point Justice Malimath Committee Report 2003 additionally supported the 154th Report of the Law Commission for presenting plea bargaining in the Indian equity organization system.

Taking into consideration all these proposals through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2005, Indian parliament added provisions for plea bargaining by including Chapter XXI-A in the form of section 265A to section 265L in Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908, which came in to effect on 5th July 2006.

It recognizes plea bargaining for cases:

Where the maximum punishment is imprisonment for 7 years

Where the offenses don't influence the socio-economic state of the nation;

When the offenses are not committed against a woman or a child below 14 are excluded

Types of Plea Bargaining

There are three types of plea bargaining i.e.

1. Sentence Bargaining;
2. Charge Bargaining;
3. Fact Bargaining.

Sentence Bargaining

It involves an arrangement to plead guilty to one of the various charges or less grave charges by the defendant in exchange for dismissal of other or higher charges. For example, a man is accused of murder and grievous hurt, a prosecutor may accept a ‘guilty' plea for grievous hurt with the court's permission in return to drop a murder charge.

Charge Bargaining

This type of plea bargaining occurs for getting less severe charges. This the most basic form of plea bargaining in criminal cases. Here the defendant admits pleading guilty to a lesser charge in consideration of dismissing greater charges. E.g. arguing for homicide for dropping the charges of homicide.

Fact Bargaining

This is usually not applied in courts because it is claimed to be against the Criminal Justice System. It happens when a defendant accepts to stipulate to some facts to prevent other facts from being included in evidence.

Judicial Perspective
The idea of plea bargaining was analyzed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court for the first time in Murlidhar Meghraj Loya v. State of Maharashtra, in this, the Court held that the thought of plea bargaining is corrupt or best case scenario a vital fiendishness. The State can never bargain with the charged. It must uphold the law. Thus, open techniques for a bargain are unthinkable. So it ought not to be presented in the Indian criminal justice framework.

A conviction dependent on the plea of guilty entered by the blamed subsequently for plea bargaining can't be continued. Such a system would be unmistakably out of line, absurd and vile and would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.

In the State Of Gujarat vs Natwar Harchandji Thakor, the Court recognized the significance of plea bargaining and stated that every plea of guilty� which is inferred to be a part of the statutory process in the criminal trial, should not be interpreted as a plea bargaining� ipso facto. It is a matter of matter and has to be settled on a case to case basis. Acknowledging the progressive nature of law and society, the court opined that the very purpose of the law is to provide a simple, cheap, and expeditious justice by settling disputes.

Disadvantages of Plea Bargaining

Some of the significant shortcomings of the concept of plea Bargaining as is identified in India are as below:

1. It is a menace to the right to a fair trial.
2. Including the Police in the Plea Bargaining procedures would encourage coercion.
3. By including the court in the Plea Bargaining process the court impartially is challenged.
4. Including the victim in the Plea Bargaining process would encourage corruption.
5. If the plead guilty appeal of the accused is denied then the accused would suffer great difficulty to establish himself as innocent.

Conclusion
To Conclude, plea bargaining is for sure, a debated concept. Some people have embraced it while others have rejected it. Plea bargaining certainly speeds up caseload disposition, but it does that unconstitutionally. Perhaps, we have no other alternative but to utilize this procedure. The criminal courts are too overburdened to approve each case to go on trial.

There is a necessity of spreading awareness among litigants, prosecution agencies, police, and general people to make this system more effective and there should be a thorough study of its working and its impact on conviction and crime rate and how this system should work properly. To make this more beneficial and to fulfill its aspired objectives, there is a need to amend the provisions to cope with disadvantages or criticisms and to proceed with the contemporary necessities.