Roll No.

R760218024
SAP ID 50070320
SET: B

UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND ENERGY STUDIES

End Semester Examination, July 2020
Open Book – Through Blackboard Learning Management System

Course: …Criminal Law III (CLCC2007)………………………….. Semester: IV………………..

Programme: BBALLB CL……………………………………

Time: 03 hrs. Max. Marks: 100

Instructions:
As this examination is in open-book format, the students are expected to demonstrate a very high degree of Academic Integrity
and not copy contents from resources referred. Instructors would look for understanding of the concept by the students and any
similarity found from resources online/ offline shall be penalized in terms of deduction of marks and even cancellation of paper
in requisite cases. The online examination committee of the School would also look for similarity of two answer scripts and if
answer scripts of two or more students are found similar, both the answer scripts shall be treated as copied and lead to
cancellation of the paper. In view of the aforesaid points, the students are warned that they should desist from using any unfair means.

S. No. Marks CO
1 “Mere acceptance or admission of the guilt should not be a ground for reduction of
sentence. Nor can the accused bargain with the court that as he is pleading guilty
sentence be reduced”.
CO1,C
20
Critically examine the concept of plea bargaining in India in light of above O3
jurisprudence with the help of provisions and leading case laws and distinguish
between plea bargaining and compounding of sentences.

Ans. To understand this statement we first need to understand the concept of Plea
Bargaining.
Plea Bargaining is a process of negotiation between prosecution and the accused
person or his pleader/lawyer, resulting in the accused pleading guilty for a promise
of reduction of charges, to drop some of the charges for getting a lesser punishment.

Historical Development of Plea Bargaining :-

This concept was used in the United Kingdom since almost 300 years ago, and
around 100 years in USA, In Santobello v New York 1971 , the USA Supreme Court
formally accepted that plea bargaining was essential for the administration of justice
and when properly managed, was to be encouraged. And this concept was a huge
success in the united states, India therefore tried to introduce this system

There were 3 law commission reports relating to plea bargaining

1) 142nd law commission report
 2) 154th law commission report
3) 177th law commission report

And also the Malimoth commission report,2000

the 154th Report of the law commission, first recommended the introduction of ‘Plea
bargaining’ as an alternative method to deal with huge arrears of criminal cases.
Accordingly, the criminal law (amendment) bill 2005 was passed by Rajya Sabha in
2005 and by the Lok Saba There was lots of critism against this concept being
incorporated in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even the Supreme Court has also
time and again expressed its un-happiness of concept of plea bargaining, saying that
negotiation in criminal cases is not permissible.

In the case of State of uttar Pradesh v Chanderlok the apex court held that it is
settled law that on the concept of plea bargaining court cannot dispose of the
criminal cases. The court has to decide on its merits, if the accused confesses his
guilt and appropriate sentence is required to be implemented. The court further held
in the same case that, mere acceptance or admission of the guilt should not be a
ground for reduction of sentence. Nor can the accused bargain with court that as he is
pleading guilty the sentence be reduced.

Despite all this, the government found it acceptable and section 256 A to 265- L
were added in the criminal procedure code, 1973 so as to provide for raising the plea
bargaining in certain types of criminal cases.

Finally in the case of State of Gujarat V. Natwar Haricharji Thakur, 2005, The
Gujarat HC recognized the utility of this method, as an alternative measures of
redressal to deal with huge arrears in Criminal cases

However there are some unique features of Plea Bargaining, they are:-

1) Not applicable in those offences for which the punishment exceeds 7 years
2) It does not apply where such offence affects the socio-economic condition of
the country.
3) Not applicable in those offences committed against a woman or a child below
14 years of age
4) Not applicable in those cases where the offender had a previous conviction.
5) Application for Plea bargaining must me filed by the accused voluntarily
6) Where a satisfactory disposition of the case has been worked out, the court
should dispose of the case by sentencing the accused to one-fourth of the
punishment provided or extendable as the case may be for such offence.
7) The statement or facts stated by an accused in an application for plea
bargaining shall not be used for any purpose other than for plea bargaining.

Also there are some acts where plea bargaining isn’t applicable few of them
are:

 Dowry prohibition Act, 1961.

  The commission of sati prevention Act, 1987.
 The Army Act, 1950.
 The Air Force Act, 1950.
 The Navy Act, 1957.

Difference between Plea Bargaining and Compounding of offences:-

Compounding of Offences means when complainant agrees to take back the charges
levied against the accused, while in plea bargaining the accused pleads for a lesser
punishment

Concept of plea bargaining is mentioned under section 265 A to 265 L of Crpc,

while concept of compounding of offences in mentioned in section 320 of Crpc

Compounding of offence under section 320 has the effect of acquittal of the
accused with whom such offence has been compounded. While in plea
bargaining the case still goes on

2 (a) “Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception.”

In the light of this statement, discuss the circumstances where release of the accused
on bail is mandatory. CO2,C
20
(b) Critically analyse the concept of Anticipatory bail with the help of relevant case O4
laws.

Ans. A) “Bail is a rule and Jail is an exception.”

The essence of this statement was first given by the supreme court in the
Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs Public Prosecutor,1977, This means
in certain non- serious offences or in certain conditions it is the duty of the
court to grant bail to the concerned person, as bail for him is a right in those
cases

the circumstances where release of the accused on bail is mandatory:-

1) Where the person is not accused of a non-bailable offence is arrested or

detained without warrant. In such cases, the concerned police officer if he
thinks fit shall if such person is indigent and unable to furnish surety
discharge him on executing bond without sureties

2) Where no reasonable ground exists to believe that the accused has

committed a non-bailable offence- Section 437(2) of CrPC entails that if it
appears to the concerned officer that there are not reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused has committed a non-bailable offence, but that
there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his guilt, then the accused
shall be pending such inquiry, be released on bail.

3) Where the investigation is not completed within the stipulated time

period– Section 57 of CrPC provides that a person arrested without warrant
 cannot be detained for more than 24 hours. However, if the concerned police
officer deems it necessary to detain such person for more than 24 hours for
purpose of investigation he can do so after obtaining Magistrate’s order
under Section 167 of CrPC.

4) When trial of a person accused of a non-bailable offence is not completed

within a period of 60 days– Section 437(6) of CrPC.

5) When the Court is of opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing
that the accused is not guilty of any such, it shall release the accused on
Bail- Section 437(7) of CrPC.

Though bail is a right in these cases, but bail could still be cancelled,
In the case of Public Prosecutor v. George William, the Court listed 5 circumstances
under which bail could be cancelled. They were:

 Where the accused during the period of bail commits the same offence for
which he is being tried;
 Hampers investigation;
 Tampers evidence, like intimidating prosecution witness;
 Runs away or goes beyond the control of sureties;
 Commits acts of violence against police or any informant.

B) Concept of Anticipatory Bail:-

Bail: Bail means temporary release of an accused person awaiting trial,
sometimes on condition that a sum of money is lodged to guarantee their
appearance in court
There are various types of bail amongst which anticipatory bail is one,
Anticipatory bail is the bail granted by the court in anticipation of the arrest.
When this bail is granted to a person it ensures that in case if the person is
arrested in the near future then such person shall be released on this
anticipatory bail. Commission of India in its 41st report recommended to
incorporate this provision in procedure code, The concept of Anticipatory
Bail comes into place when the accused may rightfully fear arrest in cases of
cognizable offences.

If the accused has a reason to believe that he or she may be arrested on

accusation of having committed a non-bail able offence then he or she has the
right to apply for an anticipatory bail in the Sessions Court or High Court
Procedure:
 Pleader will make an oral prayer for seven days pre-arrest notice in case the
police formulates an intention to arrest. If the bail application is rejected in
the Sessions Court then it would be applied in High Court. If the High Court
also rejects the bail, then further application on Supreme Court is permitted.

The factors are:

 The accusation made shall be grave and serious

 Likelihood of the applicant to flee or abscond from justice
 When the accusation is made with the intention of humiliating or injuring
the person by making him arrested through that accusation.

Anticipatory bail is mentioned under section 438 of CrPc

In the case of Amiya kumar v. state of west Bengal 1978, it was held that section
438 of the code empowers both the high court and the session’s court to grant the
anticipatory bail. Both the high court and the Sessions court have the competency to
grant this bail. If the Sessions court rejects the petition filed by the applicant for the
anticipatory bail then he can’t file the petition for the same in the high court.

Later, In the case of D.R. Naik v. the State of Maharashtra, 1989, it was held that if
a person files an application for anticipatory bail and it is rejected by the sessions
court, this will not put the bar over the person filing the petition to approach High
court. But if the person first approaches the high court and the petition filed by him
gets rejected, then he can’t approach the session’s court for filing the petition on the
same ground.

The Malimath committee gave observation regarding the provision of anticipatory

bail. They stated that the provision of section 438 can often misused by the people.
Such misuse of the provision is illegal. The committee suggested two conditions or
requirements for the purpose of retaining the provision.

The two conditions are as follows:

 Before granting the anticipatory bail the court shall hear the public or the
government prosecutor
 When a person files a petition of anticipatory bail it must be heard by a
 court having competent jurisdiction.

3
Critically examine the provisions related to mainte,nance of wives, children and
CO1,C
parents under section 125 of the criminal procedure code in the light of the 20
O4
judgement of Mohd. Ahmad Khan v. Shah Bano Begum.

Ans. The word ‘Maintenance’ is no where defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973. Chapter 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with provisions for
maintenance of wives, children and parents. ‘Maintenance’ in legal meaning is
money (alimony) that someone must pay regularly to a former partner, especially
when they have had children together. It is the duty of every person to maintain his
wife, children and aged parents, who are not able to sustain on their own. 

Section 125 of CrPc deals with order of maintenance of wives, children and parents,
as per section 125(1), the following people can claim maintenance

1) Wife from husband

2) Legitimate of ill legitimate minor child from his father
3) Legitimate of ill legitimate minor child (physical or mental abnormality)
4) Father/Mother from his son or daughter

In the case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Begum, Supreme Court delivered a
judgement favouring maintenance given to an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman.

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Begum

The facts of this case are given below:-

 In 1932, Shah Bano was married to Mohd. Ahmad khan
 They had 5 children.
 After 14 years of their marriage Shah Bano's husband married another
women who was younger than him.
 In 1975, when Shah Bano age was of 62 years, she was disowned by her
husband and was thrown out from her matrimonial home along with her
children.
 Ahmed Khan’s essential argument after divorce was that he cannot keep any
form of alliance or connection with his divorce wife because it is not
allowed by Islamic laws hence he is not legally responsible to maintain her
wife.

The issue was whether Section 125 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure is
concerned with Muslims or not.

The court held that Section 125 of Code Of Criminal Procedure solicited to
Muslims too, without any sought of discrimination.
Maintenance of Wife:-

In the case of Chanmuniya v Virendra Singh, Supreme Court has defined ‘Wife’
and it includes even those cases where a man and woman have been living together
as husband and wife for a reasonably long period of time. Strict proof of marriage
should not be a precondition of maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.PC.

In the case of Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v Ranantrao Shivram Adhav, the

Supreme Court held that marriage of women in accordance with Hindu rites with a
man having a living spouse is completely nullity in the eye of law and she is not
entitled to benefit under Section 125 of the Cr.PC.

A wife can claim and get maintenance from her husband in the following conditions:

 She is divorced by her husband, or

 Obtained divorce from her husband, and
 She has not remarried, and
 She is not able to maintain herself.

Maintenance of Legitimate or illegitimate minor child

Son

‘Minor’ means a person who, hasn’t attained his majority i.e., 18 years.of age

Minor Son (Whether Legitimate or Illegitimate) is entitled to get maintenance under

Section 125 of Cr.PC.

If any major child (Legitimate or Illegitimate) is abnormal (mentally or physically

unfit), then the father of that child has to maintain him and he can claim maintenance
on this ground of abnormality.

Daughter

If Minor Daughter (Legitimate or Illegitimate) is unmarried, then she is entitled to

get maintenance from her father and if she is married, then she is also entitled to get
maintenance from his father but the judge has to be satisfied that her husband doesn’t
have sufficient means for maintenance of his minor wife.
 Maintenance of Father or mother

 Natural father and mother can claim maintenance.

 Mother includes adoptive mother, she can claim maintenance from
adoptive son.
 Father can claim maintenance, it is a statutory obligation, this claim
cannot be defeated by pleading that the father failed to fulfil his parental
obligation.
 A childless stepmother can claim maintenance.

Before granting maintenance the court shall check these Essential conditions

1. Sufficient means for maintenance are available.

2. Neglect or refusal to maintain after the demand for maintenance.
3. The person claiming maintenance must be unable to maintain
himself/herself.
4. Quantum of maintenance depends on the standard of living.

4 Examine in brief the concept of Rehabilitation and social Re-integration incorporated

20 CO3
in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Ans. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is made for
offenders who haven’t received the age of majority (18 years) who are known as
juvenlies

The prime focus of this act is to solve various issues relating to child welfare system,
enhancement of probation system, social reintegration and children in conflict in law

A "juvenile" is a person who has not attained his 18 th birthday. A person over
eighteen but under twenty-one years of age is also accorded juvenile treatment if the
act of juvenile delinquency occurred prior to him turning 18

Since Socio-economic circumstances of a family often result in stress, family

disintegration and child destitution. Therefore, various programmes and reform
centres were formed for protection for the disadvantaged young ones. The basic aim
of the social worker was to protect the child from being separated from their family,
prevention of the family from being disintegrated and abandonment of the child.

Few highlights of JJ Act are

  The principle of presumption of Innocence, where any child is presumed to be
innocent of criminal intention up to the age of 18 years.

 The principle of dignity and worth.

 The principle of Participation, where every child shall have right to be heard and
participate in events that could change his life

 The principle of best interest, wherein all the decisions the primary
consideration regarding the child must the child’s best interest.

 The principle of family responsibility where the primary responsibility of

care, nurture and protection of child, etc

While heading a case, there shall be a Juvenile Justice board that shall consist of
Metropolitan Magistrate or a Chief Judicial Magistrate with at least 3 years of
experience and two social workers, of whom at least one shall be a women.

This board may pass orders against children in conflict with law, such as Giving the
child a firm warning, letting the child go home while simultaneously counselling the
parents ,Order to attend group counselling sessions, Order to perform supervised
community service; Order to parents or guardians to pay fine, Releasing the child on
probation, where the parents or guardians will have to execute a bond, etc

5 Critically evaluate the salient features of The Probation of offenders Act, 1958 CO2,
20
CO4
Ans. The concept of Probation is the reformation of the offender than to punish him,
Instead of keeping an accused in a jail, the court can order freedom on promise of
good behaviour and conduct, It is believed that imprisonment decreases the capacity
of an offender to readjust to the normal society even after the release.

The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, improvises on the concept that young
offenders can be saved from becoming habitual offenders by treating them well and
providing them with a chance to reform rather than putting them into jails with other
criminals.
The probation officer insists on the problem or need of the offender and tries to
solve his problem.

Section 360 of the CrPc deals with this concept, it states, When any person not under
twenty-one years of age is convicted of an offence punishable with fine only or with
imprisonment for a term of seven years or less, or when any person under twenty-one
years of age or any woman is convicted of an offence not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life, and no previous conviction is proved against the offender
if it appears to the Court before which he is convicted, regard being had to the age,
character or antecedents of the offender, and to the circumstances in which the
offence was committed, that it is expedient that the offender should be released on
probation of good conduct, the Court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any
punishment, direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with or without
sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period (not
exceeding three years) as the Court may direct and in the meantime to keep the peace
and be of good behaviour

Supreme Court in the case of Jugal Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar, explained the
rationale of the provision.
The object of the provision is to prevent the conversion of youthful offenders into
criminals as a result of their association with criminals of mature age in case the
youthful offenders are sentenced to undergo imprisonment in jail.

In Basikesan v. State of Orissa, a youth of 20 years was found guilty of an offence

punishable under section 380 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and no previous conviction
was proved against him. It was held by the court that the offence committed by the
accused was not out of deliberate preparation therefore court ordered that he should
be released after due admonition.

Important Salient Features of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 are :

(1) The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 is intended to reform the amateur
offenders by rehabilitate in society and to prevent the conversion of youthful
offenders into criminals under environmental influence by keeping them in jails
along with serious criminals.

(2) It aims to release first offenders, after due admonition or warning with advice
who are alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Sections 379, 380,
381, 404 or Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and also in case of any offence
punishable with imprisonment for not more than two years, or with fine, or with
both.

(3) This Act empowers the Court to release certain offenders on probation of good
conduct if the offence alleged to have been committed must not be punishable with
death or life imprisonment. However, he should be kept under supervision.

(4) The Act insists that the Court may order for payment by the offender such
compensation and a cost of the proceedings as it thinks reasonable for loss or injury
caused to the victim.

(5) The Act provides special protection to persons under twenty-one years of age not
to sentence him to imprisonment. However, this provision is not available to a person
found guilty of an offence punishable with life imprisonment.

(6) The Act provides an important role to the probation officers to help the Court and
to supervise the probationers put under him and to advise and assist them to get
suitable employment.

In the end it could be concluded that probation of offenders is an alternative to the

punishment theory, and it could be very beneficial for our country as we have a
young population base, and also the jails are overcrowded, This theory allows a
transformation of a young offender who could prove to be a great asset to the country
later.

I, Hrithik Sharma, understand that submitting work that isn’t my own may
result in failure in this paper and I may also be subject to Disciplinary
Proceedings as per the Academic Integrity policy of the University.