ADR in Criminal Cases: A Comparative Analysis between India and Bangladesh

Abstract

ADR is defined as a method of resolving disputes between litigants in a quick and easy way outside of official court proceedings. criminal courts in India and Bangladesh are overburdened with an exorbitant number of pending cases, posing an acute danger to both victim and offender, as well as the state, producing further problems in the criminal justice system. ADR has become increasingly prominent in the realm of criminal justice as a viable substitute for traditional court proceedings. This research examines the changing legal frameworks, current situations, and practical use of ADR methods in the criminal justice systems of the both countries. The application of ADR in criminal justice system in both India and Bangladesh poses a distinctive amalgamation of challenges and prospects. The legal system in India exhibits a wide range of ADR approaches, such as compounding, plea bargaining, and restorative justice, which contribute to its diversified legal environment. In contrast, Bangladesh predominantly relies on compounding as its primary ADR method. This research also highlights the global implementation of ADR in criminal cases. This research applies a comparative methodology to examine the results, shortcomings, and insights gained from the application of ADR in criminal cases. The research encompasses various aspects, including advantages, disadvantages, the level of satisfaction experienced by victims, and the potential for mitigating the number of pending cases inside the courts of both nations. The findings and recommendations provide insight into the difficulties encountered by ADR in criminal proceedings, encompassing concerns pertaining to legal protections, transparency and implementation of ADR in criminal justice system contexts of both nations.