Satakchhi Priya Verma, LL.B., Symbiosis Law School, Pune
ABSTRACT
Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR, has demonstrated its efficacy as an alternative to the court’s traditional settlement method in civil matters. The primary reason for the founding of ADR was to minimize the load on courts and make litigation more affordable and flexible for individuals who cannot afford to invest more time and money. In the Criminal Jurisprudence, all criminal activities and offences are considered crimes against the State, but not the victim, and only the State has the Jurisdiction to handle them. Since ADR is a dispute resolution mechanism, it is difficult to classify a crime as a dispute; hence, ADR is limited to minor crimes such as marital disputes, motor vehicle lawsuits, etc. However, the Indian Courts are now overburdened with cases, resulting in pending litigation. While other courts must follow the standard and long procedure, criminal courts have procedures for summary trial and rapid trial to help dispose of a limited number of cases. The realm of criminal law is prevention of wrongs against society for the purpose of protecting society itself. ADRS in criminal trials is formally applied in two forms, that is, plea bargaining and compounding offences. The article proposes an overview of ADRS, its application and importance in criminal jurisprudence with prime focus over criminal justice system of India. This study focuses on the significance of ADR in criminal trials and seeks to expand usage. The primary objective of this study has been to inform readers about the significance of ADR.
Keywords: ADR, Criminal Justice System, Criminal Trial, Restorative justice, Plea Bargaining,
Comments