Evolution of Judicial Administration Under Early British Rule
Judicial Reforms Under Early British Rule
1. Warren Hastings’ Judicial Plan of 1772 (First Judicial Plan)
Introduction
Warren Hastings became Governor of Bengal in 1772. He abolished the system of Double Government and introduced the First Judicial Plan of 1772. It was the first systematic attempt to organize courts in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
Main Features
- Division into Districts: The whole territory was divided into districts. Each district had a Collector.
- Mofussil Diwani Adalat (Civil Court):
- Established in every district.
- The Collector acted as judge.
- Hindu law for Hindus; Muslim law for Muslims was applied.
- Help of Pandits and Kazis was taken.
- Mofussil Faujdari Adalat (Criminal Court):
- Tried criminal cases.
- Muslim law was applied.
- Supervised by the Collector.
- Death sentence cases went to the Sadar Nizamat Adalat.
- Sadar Diwani Adalat: The highest civil court at Calcutta. The Governor and Council heard appeals above Rs. 500.
- Sadar Nizamat Adalat: The highest criminal court. Death sentences were confirmed here.
- Small Causes Court: Petty cases up to Rs. 10 were decided locally.
Assessment
- Merits: Personal laws protected; Court fee system introduced; Reduced corruption.
- Demerits: Too much power vested in the Collector; Fewer courts established.
The Plan of 1772 laid the foundation of the Adalat System in India.
2. Judicial Plan of 1774
Introduction
The 1772 Plan led to corruption by Collectors. Therefore, a new plan was introduced in 1774.
Main Features
- Collectors were removed.
- Indian officers called Diwan/Amil were appointed.
- Bengal was divided into 6 divisions.
- Provincial Councils (English officers) supervised revenue.
- Appeals above Rs. 1000 went to the Sadar Diwani Adalat.
Defects
- Provincial Councils became corrupt.
- Delay in justice occurred.
The 1774 Plan was temporary and not very successful.
3. Judicial Plan of 1780
Introduction
In 1780, Warren Hastings reformed the 1774 Plan.
Main Features
- Separation of judicial and revenue functions.
- Provincial Councils handled only revenue.
- Civil Procedure Code prepared (first in India).
- Appointment of Sir Elijah Impey in the Sadar Diwani Adalat.
- Criminal courts supervised by a new department.
Problems
- Few courts existed.
- Delay in justice.
- Witnesses had to travel long distances.
The 1780 Plan improved procedure but still had defects.
4. Judicial Reforms of Lord Cornwallis (1793)
Introduction
Lord Cornwallis introduced major reforms between 1787–1793. His reforms are collectively called the Cornwallis Code (1793).
Main Features
- Separation of Judiciary and Executive.
- Collector removed from judicial work.
- Provincial Courts of Appeal established.
- Munsif Courts created for petty cases.
- Security of tenure granted to law officers.
- Court fee abolished.
- Legal profession organized.
Assessment
- Merits: Reduced corruption; Better court structure; Judicial control over the executive.
- Demerits: Indians excluded from higher posts; System became expensive.
Cornwallis completed the judicial system started by Warren Hastings.
Early Company Charters and Settlements
1. Emergence of the East India Company – Charter of 1600
The East India Company was established on 31 December 1600 by a Royal Charter granted by Elizabeth I. This Charter gave the Company exclusive rights to trade in the East Indies, including India. No other English merchant could trade in those areas without permission from the Company. The Charter was granted for fifteen years and could be renewed by the Crown.
The Company was managed by one Governor and twenty-four Directors, elected by the shareholders in the General Court. At this stage, the Company was only a trading body and had no political power. Its main aim was to earn profit through trade in spices, silk, cotton, and other goods.
In the beginning, there was no proper judicial system in India under the Company. Disputes between English merchants were decided by Company officials themselves. There was no separation between executive and judiciary. The officials were traders, not trained judges. Decisions were often based on personal judgment rather than fixed legal principles.
The Charter of 1600 laid the foundation for British trade in India. Though it did not establish a proper court system, it marked the beginning of British legal and administrative influence in India.
2. Charter of 1661
The Charter of 1661 was granted by Charles II. This Charter was very important because it gave the East India Company judicial and administrative powers in its settlements in India.
Under this Charter, the Company was allowed to appoint a Governor and Council in each settlement. The Governor and Council were given power to decide civil and criminal cases. They could try and punish all persons living in the Company’s territories, including Indians. They could even award severe punishments such as imprisonment and death penalty.
This Charter formally introduced English law into India. The Company was empowered to make laws, rules, and regulations for better governance of its settlements. Thus, the Company slowly started exercising political authority along with commercial activities.
However, there were serious defects. There was no separation between executive and judiciary. The Governor and Council performed both administrative and judicial functions. Judges were not legally trained persons. There was no fixed procedure for trials. The system depended largely on the personal discretion of officials.
The Charter of 1661 marked an important step in transforming the Company from a trading organization into a political and judicial authority in India.
3. Settlement of Surat
The first English factory in India was established at Surat in 1612 during the reign of Jahangir. In 1615, Sir Thomas Roe obtained a Firman from the Mughal Emperor allowing the English to reside and trade freely.
According to the Firman, English people were allowed to follow their own religion and settle disputes among themselves according to English law. However, disputes between Englishmen and Indians were decided by Indian courts under Mughal law.
The Surat settlement was managed by a President and Council. They handled both trade and administration. There was no separate court system. Company officials, who were mainly merchants, decided disputes. There was no professional judiciary.
In cases involving only English people, English law was applied. In cases involving Indians, local laws were followed. This created a dual system of justice. There was no clear procedure, and executive officers also acted as judges.
The Surat settlement was important because it was the first step in establishing British authority in India. Though the judicial system was weak and unorganized, it laid the foundation for future legal development in Presidency Towns.
4. Settlement of Presidency Towns (All Phases)
The three Presidency Towns were Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. These settlements gradually developed structured judicial systems before 1726.
- Madras: Established in 1639. Initially, justice was administered by the Agent and Council. In Black Town, petty cases were decided by the Choultry Court. Later, the High Court of Judicature was formed. Admiralty Courts were also established for maritime cases.
- Bombay: Transferred to the Company in 1668. English law replaced Portuguese law. Courts were established for civil and criminal cases. A Court of Admiralty was also created. In 1718, a new Court of Judicature was formed to improve administration.
- Calcutta: Founded in 1690 by Job Charnock. The Company acted as Zamindar and exercised judicial powers. Appeals were made to the Governor and Council. Mughal courts also functioned for Indians.
In all Presidency Towns, there was no real separation of powers. Judges were not trained. Executive officers controlled judicial work. However, these developments gradually led to the establishment of Mayor’s Courts in 1726.
5. Mayor’s Court – Charter of 1726 (Salient Provisions, Merits and Demerits)
The Charter of 1726 was issued by George I. It is considered a landmark in Indian legal history because it established a uniform judicial system in the Presidency Towns.
The Charter created Mayor’s Courts in Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. Each town had a Corporation consisting of one Mayor and nine Aldermen. The Mayor’s Court was a Court of Record and had civil jurisdiction. Criminal cases were handled by the Governor and Council acting as Justices of Peace. Appeals from Mayor’s Court lay to the Governor and Council, and further appeal lay to the King-in-Council (Privy Council).
Merits of the Charter include establishment of uniform courts, introduction of appeal system, application of English law, and partial separation of executive and judiciary.
However, there were defects. Judges were not legally trained. Executive interference continued. English law was applied without considering Indian customs. Indians had limited representation. Judicial independence was weak.
Despite defects, the Charter of 1726 laid the foundation of the modern judicial system in India.