‘Non-gender offences’ against women eligible for plea bargaining: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently held that the bar under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on plea bargaining in offences against women will apply only with respect to gender-centric offences like sexual assault, sexual harassment or offences related to marriage etc. and not to non-gender offences committed against women..In an order passed on August 7, Justice G Jayachandran said that offences against women in the context of Section 189 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita should cover only offences which are based on gender and not any general offences committed against a woman.The latter, therefore, should be eligible for plea bargaining, the Court said.The term “offences against women” that is excluded from plea bargaining will apply only to “gender-centric" offences, the Court made it clear.The judge also laid down suggestions for trial courts to consider while dealing with applications for plea bargaining..Justice Jayachandran said that trial courts must inform the accused about their right to invoke plea bargaining soon after the framing charges, thus allowing the accused to exercise such right before the expiry of 30 days from the date of framing charges as prescribed under the new criminal laws.The Court also said that trial courts must take assistance from legal services authorities to ensure parties could voluntarily take advantage of plea bargaining and save judicial time..Offences like harassment to woman under the Special Act or sexual offences, criminal force and assault against woman or offences related to marriage where the victim is the woman will fall under gender centric/gender neutral offences. Unlike I.P.C fortunately, the Bharathiya Nayaya Sanhita (BNS) has brought all these offences under one chapter and grouped in Chapter V of BNS under the caption ‘of offences against woman and child.’ In the considered view of this Court, only those offences will fall under gender centric or gender-neutral offences to attract the expression ‘offence against a woman’ and be excluded from the scope of plea bargaining,” the High Court said..The Court was hearing a petition filed by one G Venkateshan challenging a trial court order that had refused to accept his application for plea bargaining.Venkateshan had first approached the High Court seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him for having obstructed a woman bailiff from serving summons to his wife. After he expressed regret over his actions, the High Court had asked him to approach the trial court with an application for plea bargaining.He moved the High Court again after his application was rejected by the trial court..Justice Jayachandran noted that the application had been rejected by the trail court judge on the ground that he had caused hurt to a woman bailiff and offences against women were not eligible for plea bargaining.The High Court held that in the present case however, the offence alleged against Venkateshan were “non-gender in nature,” and eligible to be considered for plea bargaining under Chapter XXI-A of the Criminal Procedure Code and Chapter XXIII of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita..Advocate C Emalias appeared for Venkateshan, the petitioner.Government Advocate KMD Muhilan appeared for the State government.Advocate J Chandran Sundar Sashikumar appeared for the bailiff, the defacto complainant in the case.Senior Counsel R John Sathyan was the amicus curiae appointed by the Court. He was assisted by advocate CK Chandrasekkar, the Standing Counsel for Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority..[Read Order]