Report No. 142
The observations of the Supreme Court that a conviction based on the plea of guilty entered by the appellant as a result of plea-bargaining cannot be sustained should be understood in the context of the plea-bargaining entered in an informal way without legal sanction. If a law provides for entering a voluntary plea of guilty and a concessional treatment being accorded in the light of the statutory authority of law in accordance with the prescribed guidelines by a judicial authority, it would not be possible to say that the conviction based on the plea of guilty is erroneous.
6.15. Public Policy.-
Inducing an accused to make a voluntary confession of guilt is undoubtedly against public policy as observed by the Supreme Court. In the fact of the case before the Supreme Court there was material to indicate that the accused entered plea of guilty because of an "inducement" by the prosecution and the Magistrate.
In suggesting the enactment of a law providing for a scheme of concessional treatment, the Commission has ensured that, no inducement is offered. On the contrary, the provisions of the proposed law would make it abundantly clear that it is entirely up to the accused to consider whether a plea of guilt should be entered or not and there would be no negotiations with the prosecution. The law as suggested does not suffer from any infirmity on this count.