Plea Bargaining Practices: Comparative Analysis Of Its Evolution In The USA, India And European Jurisdiction
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 10
- 1 min read
Updated: Nov 12
Sofia Saini & Ms. Parneet Kaur
ABSTRACT
The Plea-Bargaining practices of three jurisdictions India, the US and a few European systems are critically examined in this article. Beginning with the broad function of plea bargaining, the article highlights it as a tool that expedites court proceedings, lessens the strain of trials, and offers practical advantages to both the State and the accused. Specifically, the concept of the plea bargaining has grown to be one of the most important aspects of the criminal justice administration in the United States, largely due to court rulings. In contrast, although there are still structural and sociolegal obstacles to its implementation, the practice was only legally introduced in India in 2006, as a response to growing case backlogs and prolonged pre-trial detention. Moving to European approaches, civil law regimes such as Germany and France rely on negotiated justice models that prioritize court scrutiny, whereas the United Kingdom acknowledges sentencing reductions for guilty pleas. Despite these, plea bargaining is gradually being accepted as a useful aspect of criminal judicial systems in most parts of the world. Nonetheless, important issues remain, including fairness, voluntariness, and the possibility of coercion. Considering these current issues, this paper aims to propose a reasonable framework in which the proposed justice system can safeguard the rights of the accused without sacrificing the effectiveness, transparency, and integrity of criminal trials.
Keywords: Criminal Justice, Fair Trial, Comparative Analysis, Plea Bargaining, and Judicial Efficiency.
