Excessive delay in justice will affect the creditability and reliability of the judiciary. Under the traditional form of criminal adjudication, an impartial adjudicator, after a formal adversarial trial, determines guilt and imposes a penalty appropriate for the offender from the range prescribed by legislation. Plea Bargaining is such an alternative ‘deal’ available which settle a criminal dispute without putting up the accused for a formal trial. This research aims to explore the origin and concept of ‘plea bargaining’ a divergence from traditional model, available under the Indian legal system and the present status of the remedy in India, post the criminal Law Amendment Act 2005. It will explore its application in United States and England. Further it discusses some ethical and legal issues for a better implementation of the provisions in question. No doubt efficiency and speedy disposal of cases are important and desirable goals. The question that is considered in this note is whether they are worth the perceived costs of plea bargaining. To this end, an attempt is made to examine whether there is any inherent impropriety in the system of plea negotiation. The research concludes that the provisions in chapter XXIA has been implemented in an extremely cautious manner
