Ipshita Bhattacharya, Asst.

Professor, School of Law, JLU

UNIT-I-Early European Settlements
 Early Emergence of EIC
• The East India Company was founded during the rule
of Queen Elizabeth I.
• In 1600, a group of London merchants led by Sir
Thomas Smyth petitioned Queen Elizabeth I to grant
them a royal charter to trade with the countries of the
eastern hemisphere.
• ‘Honourable Company of Merchants of London
Trading with the East Indies=EIC
• As the name suggests, the Company’s humble origins
was as a small group of investors and businessmen
looking to capitalise on these new trading
opportunities.
• Their first expedition left for Asia in 1601 with four
ships commanded by James Lancaster.
• The expedition returned two years later with a cargo of
pepper weighing almost 500 tons! James Lancaster
was duly knighted for his service.
James Lancaster
• When the East India Company first visited the Mughal
court in the early 17th century, it was as supplicants
attempting to negotiate favourable trading relations with
Akbar’s successor, Emperor Jehangir.
• The company had initially planned to try and force their
way into the lucrative spice markets of south-east Asia, but
found this trade was already dominated by the Dutch.
• After EIC merchants were massacred at Amboyna in 1623,
the company increasingly turned their attention to India.
• Gradually they began to build small bases, or factories,
on India’s eastern and western coasts.
• From these coastal toeholds, they orchestrated the
profitable trade in spices, textiles and luxury goods on
which their commercial success was predicated,
dealing with Indian artisans and producers primarily
through Indian middlemen.
• European competitors also began to have an increased
presence on the subcontinent, with France emerging
as a major national and imperial rival during the War
of Austrian Succession and the Seven Years War.
• This particularly increased the strategic importance of
the EIC’s Indian footholds, and the country’s coastline
became crucial to further imperial expansion in Asia
and Africa.
 BoP & BoB
• After military victories at the battles of Plassey (1757) and
Buxar (1764), the EIC was granted the diwani of Bengal –
control over the administration of the region and the right
to collect tax revenue.
• The company expanded its influence over local rulers in
the south, until by the 1770s the balance of power had
fundamentally changed.
• Expansion continued and rivals such as the Maratha
people in western India and Tipu Sultan of Mysore were
defeated.
• The Battle of Buxar was fought on 22/23 October 1764, between
the forces under the command of the British East India Company,
led by Hector Munro, and the combined armies of Mir Qasim,
Nawab of Bengal till 1764; the Nawab of Awadh Shuja-ud-Daula;
and the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II.
• Dastak was the trade permit sanctioned to the east india
company by the Mughal government. ...
• Farman this right of free trade covered by the dastaks was
restricted to the company alone. This right, according to
the farman, was not to be exercised by the company's private
traders.
 British Paramountcy
• By 1818, the EIC was the paramount political power in
India, with direct control over two thirds of the
subcontinent’s landmass and indirect control over the rest.
• The first years of EIC rule were notorious for their
corruption and profiteering – the so-called ‘shaking of the
pagoda tree’ or ‘rape of Bengal’.
• Individual nabobs (as EIC employers were derisively
dubbed) amassed massive personal fortunes, often at the
expense of their Indian subjects.
• Yet the late 18th century also saw the development of
what would become the basis of the EIC state in India.
• As traders sought to become administrators and
develop systems of rule compatible with both their
Georgian ideas of political economy and the specific
circumstances in India.
• India’s large population and sophisticated social, political and
economic institutions made imperialistic ideas of terra
nullius (empty land) inapplicable in India,
• India was a ‘colony of exploitation’, rather than one of
settlement; its value to the EIC lay primarily in the profits that
could be made by controlling its internal markets and
international trade, appropriating peasant production and, above
all, collecting tax revenue.
• These taxes paid for both a large standing army, and a sizeable
cadre of EIC employees and covenanted civil servants who
worked in India, but did not ultimately settle there.
 DEVELOPMENT OF LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY
UNDER THE CHARTERS
CHARTER OF 1600 A.D
• ON 31st DECEMBER,1600 QUEEN ELIZABETH 1 GRANTED A
CHARTER TO THE EICO .
• IT GRANTED THE COMPANY TO TRADE INTO AND FROM THE
EAST INDIES,IN THE COUNTRIES AND PARTS OF ASIA AND AFRICA.
• IT WAS FOR 15 YEARS.
• IT ALSO GAVE THE LEGISLATIVE POWER TO THE COMPANY--TO
MAKE BYLAWS, ORDINANCES FOR THE GOOD GOVERNANCE OF
THE COMPANY AND ITS SERVANTS.
• TO PUNISH OFFENCES AGAINST THE SERVANTS BY FINE OR
IMPRISONMENT ACCORDING TO THE LAWS, STATUTES AND
CUSTOMS OF THE REALMS.
 SIGNIFICANCE OF CHARTER OF 1600 AD
• THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER WERE ONLY IN
CONNECTION WITH THE TRADE AND WERE NOT
INTENDED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF DOMINION IN
INDIA.
• THE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY WERE GIVEN TO THE
COMPANY IN ORDER TO ENABLE IT TO REGULATE ITS
OWN BUSINESS AND MAITAIN DISCIPLINE AGAINST ITS
SERVANTS.
 CHARTER OF 1609 A.D.
• CLAUSES OF THE ACT .
• ON 31st MAY 1609 JAMES I OF ENGLAND GRANTED A
FRESH CHARTER TO THE COMPANY .
• THIS CHARTER CONTINUED THE PRIVILEGES OF THE
COMPANY IN PERPETUITY,SUSEQUENT TO THE
PROVISIONS THAT THEY COULD BE WITHDRAWN
AFTER THREE YEARS NOTICE.
• THE COMPANY WAS ALSO AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE
THE ENJOYMENTS OF ALL THE PRIVILEGES,POWERS
AND RIGHTS WHICH WERE EARLIER GRANTED TO IT BY
QUEEN ELIZABETH 1UNDER THE CHARTER ACT OF
1600A.D.
 SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS
• IN ORDER TO ENABLE THE COMPANY TO PUNISH ITS
SERVANT FOR GROSSER OFFENCES ON LONG VOYAGES THE
COMPANY SECURED THE FIRST ROYAL COMMISSION IN
1601 A.D
• UNDER THE COMMISSION IT WAS PROVIDED THAT THE
COMPANY WILL GIVE ORDERS TO ITS CAPTAINS SUBJECT
TO ONE CODITION THAT IN CASE OF CAPITAL
OFFENCES,e.g, WILFUL MURDER AND MUTINY,A JURY OF
12 SERVANTS OF THE COMPANY WILL GIVE THE VERDICT.
• THE COMPANY WAS GIVEN THIS POWER SO AS TO
MAINTAIN DISCIPLINE ON BOARD DURING THE VOYAGES.
• SOME ADDITIONAL POWERS WERE ALSO GIVEN TO
THE COMPANNY FOR ENFORCING THE MARTIAL
LAWBY THE CHARTER ACT OF 1623 A.D.
• UNDER ONE SUCH DEVELOPMENT THE TRIAL OF
GREGORY LELLINGTON WAS HELD ON 28 FEB, 1616.
ON BOARD THE SHIP CHARLES THAT WAS LYING AT THE
SURAT PORT.
• THE FARMAN OF 1618 A.D BY JAHANGIR
• IN 1618 AD.SIR THOMAS ROE SUCCEEDED IN GETTING
THE EMPEROR FAVOUR AND THE EICO ENTERED INTO
THE TREATY WITH THE MUGHAL EMPEROR.
• THIS PROVED A TURNING POINT IN THE LEGAL
HISTORY OF OF INDIA AS THE EICO SECURED VARIOUS
PRIVILEGES FROM THE MUGHAL EMPEROR.
• CLAUSES
• THAT THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE COMPANY’S
SERVANTS WILL BE REGULATED BY THEIR OWN
TRIBUNALS.
• THAT THE ENGLISH PEOPLE WILL ENJOY THEIR OWN
RELIGION AND LAWS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE
COMPANY
• THAT THE LOCAL NATIVE AUTHORITIES WILL SETTLE
SUCH DISPUTES CASES IN WHICH THE ENGLISHMEN
AND THE HINDUS AND OR MUSLIMS WERE THE
PARTIES
• THAT THE MUGHAL GOVERNOR OR QAZI OF THE
REVELENT PLACE WILL PROTECT THE ENGLISH PEOPLE.
 CATCH

• AT THIS POINT OF TIME,THE ENGLISHMEN AT THE SURAT

FACTORY WERE LIVING UNDER TWO DIFFERENT SYSTEMS
OF LAW.
• IN SOME CASES THEY WERE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THEINDIAN LAWS AND IN SOME OTHER CASES THEY WERE
UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF BRITISH LAWS.
• NOW IN THE CASES INVOLVING INDIANS AND THE BRITISH
THE INDIAN COURTS HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT.
• THE BRITISHERS USED TO BRIBE THE INDIAN JUDICIAL
OFFICERS,THEREBY JEOPARDIZING THE JUDICIARY.
• THE CHARTER ACT OF 1635.
• IN 1635.CHARLES I PERMITTED SIR WILLIAM
COURTEEN TO ESTABLISH A NEW BODY FOR THE
PURPOSE OF TRADING WITH THE EAST INDIES UNDER
THE NAME OF COURTEEN’N ASSOCIATION.
• THE OLD COMPANY FACED COMPETITION AT THE
HANDS OF THE NEW COMPANY AND MANY OTHER
DIFFICULTIES WERE CREATED IN ENGLAND WHICH
CONTINUED UPTO 1637
 CHARTER ACT OF 1657

• IN 1657,OLIVER CROMWELL GRANTED THE NEW

CHARTER WHICH AMALGATED THETHE VARIOUS JOINT
STOCKS INTO ONE STOCK.
• THE CHARTER ACT ALSO ENDED THE OLD RIVALRY
BETWEEN THE COURTEEN ASSOCIATION AND THE OLD
COMPANY BY UNITING THE TWO.HENCE THE CHARTER
ACT IN A SENSE CHANGE THE VERY CHARTER OF THE
EAST INDIA COMPANY.
 CHARTER OF 1661 A.D

• THE CHARTER OF 1661 REORGANIZEDTHE COMPANY

ON A JOINT STOCK PRINCIPLE AND EACH MEMBER HAS
A SHARE CAPITAL OF $500 WAS GIVEN THE RIGHT TO
ONE VOTE IN THE GENERAL COURT OF THE COMPANY.
• IN ORDER TO MEET THE EXISITING CIRCUMSTANCES
MORE EFFECTIVELY,THE COMPANY’S POWER AND
COMMAND OVER ITS FORTRESSES WAS
STRENGTHENED
• THE COMPANY WAS AUTHORIZED TO APPOINT
GOVERNERS AND OTHER OFFICERS FOR PROPER
ADMINISTRATION.
• THE COMPANIES POWER TO GOVERN ITS EMPLOYEES
AND TO PUNISH THEIR DISOBEDIENCE AND
MISDEMENOUR WAS ENHANCED.
• IT FURTHER AUTHORIZED THE COMPANY TO EMPOWER
THE GOVERNOR AND THE COUNCIL OF EACH ONE OF ITS
FACTORIESOR TRADING CENTRES AT MADRAS BOMBAY
AAND CALCUTTA TO ADMINISTER BOTH CIVIL AND
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACCORDING TO THE ENGLISH LAW.
• WHERE THERE IS NO GOVERNOR, THE CHIEF REACTOR OF
A TRADING CENTRE AND HIS COUNCIL WAS AUTHORIZED
TO SEND A MAN FOR TRIAL TO A PLACE WHERE THERE
WAS A GOVERNOR .
 CHARTER OF 1668 A.D

• CHARLES II TRANSFERRED THE ISLAND OF BOMBAY TO

EICO,WHICH HE GOT AS A DOWERY BY MARRYING THE
PRINCES OF PORTUGAL.
• THIS CHARTER AUTHORIZED THE COMPANY TO MAKE
LAWS,ORDERS,ORDINANCES AND CONSTITUTIONS FOR
THE GOOD GOVERNMENT OF THE ISLAND OF BOMBAY
 CHARTER ACT OF 1683 A.D.

• IT AUTHORIZED THE COMPANY TO RAISE MILITARY

FORCES.
• TO ESTABLISH ADMIRALITY COURTS----FOR THE
MECHANTS.
 CHARTER OF 1686 A.D.

• TO ESTABLISH MUNICIPALITY AND MAYOR’S COURT IN

MADRAS.
• TO APPOINT ADMIRALS,WITH THE POWERS OF
RAISING THE NAVAL FORCES AND EXERCISE MARTIAL
LAW OVER THEM IN TIMES OF WAR
 CHARTER ACT OF 1698 A.D.

• THE CHARTER CREATED A COURT OF DIRECTORS.

• THE AUTHORITY AND CONTROL OVER THE AFFAIRS OF
THE UNITED COMPANY WAS ENTRUSTED TO THE
COURT OF PROPRIETORS.
• THIS SITUATION CONTINUED TILL THE PASSING OF THE
FAMOUS REGULATING ACT OF 1773 A.D.
 Regulating Act, (1773)
• legislation passed by the British Parliament for the regulation of
the British East India Company’s Indian territories, mainly
in Bengal. It was the first intervention by the British government
in the company’s territorial affairs and marked the beginning of a
takeover process that was completed in 1858.
• Regulating Act of 1773 was of great constitutional importance
as it was the first step taken by the British Government to
control and regulate the affairs of East India Company in India
and also recognised the political and administrative functions of
the Company for the first time.
 Reason
• The chaotic situation brought about by the
misgovernment of Bengal forced the British parliament to
enquire into the affairs of the East India Company.
• This revealed gross malpractices of the senior officials of
the company.
• The company was also facing a financial crisis at this time
and had applied to the British government for a loan of
one million pounds.
• The British Parliament found it necessary to regulate the
activities of the company in India and for this, the
Regulating act of 1773 was passed.
• The main provisions of the act were the appointment
of a governor-general of Fort William in Bengal with
supervisory powers over the presidencies of Madras
and Bombay.
• The governor-general had a council of four and was
given a casting vote but no veto.
• A supreme court of four English judges was set up in
Calcutta (now Kolkata).
 Key Features of the Regulating Act of 1773
• 1. It designated the Governor-General of Bengal and
created an Executive Council of four members to assist
him. Lord Warren Hastings was the first Governor-General
of Bengal.
2. Governors of Bombay and Madras presidencies
subordinate to the Governor-general of Bengal.
3. It provided for the establishment of a Supreme Court at
Calcutta (1774) with one Chief Justice and three other
Judges.
4. It prohibited the servants of the Company from
engaging in any private trade or accepting presents or
bribes from the natives.
 The Act of Settlement
1781
• The Act of Settlement was an Amending Act of 1781,
which was passed by British Parliament on 5th July
1781 to remove the defects of the Regulating Act
1773.
• It is also known as Declaratory Act, 1781.
• The Aim of the Act
• The main objectives of the enactment of this Act were :
• To remove ambiguity regarding the few provisions of the
Regulating Act and the Charter which had created the
division between the court and the government.
• To support the lawful government of Bengal, Bihar, and
Orissa, so that revenue could be collected smoothly.
• To maintain and protect the laws and customs of the
native people.
 Key Provisions (features) of the Act
• Change in the powers of the Supreme Court
• The servants of the company which earlier came
within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court were now
exempted from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
• By the enactment of this Act, the court’s geographical
jurisdiction became limited to only Calcutta.
• Non-interference in Revenue matters
• The court now had no jurisdiction in the revenue
matters concerning revenue, or any act was done in
the collection thereof, the government now became
independent of the control of the court in the matter
of revenue.
• The Shift of Appellate Jurisdiction from Court to the
Governor-General and Council
• The Appellate jurisdiction shifted in the hands of the
Governor-General and Council. Now, the appeals went
from Provincial Courts to the Governor-General in
council.
•
• The Assertion on the application of the personal laws
• This act asserted that Mohammedan law should be
applied on the Mohammedan cases and similarly, the
Hindu law must be applied to Hindu cases.
 The major impacts of this act were :
• The act gave superior authority to the council over the
court and favoured the council.
• This act made the position of the council very strong
so that it could continue to have a good control over
the Indian empire.
• It was the first attempt to separate the executive from
the judiciary by defining the respective areas of
jurisdiction.
• To clear the defects of 1773 regulating act, Pits India
act was passed in 1784 which divides the company's
political and administrative powers.
• It resulted in dual control or joint government in India
by Crown in Great Britain and the British East India
Company, with crown having ultimate authority.
• With this act, East India Company’s political functions
were differentiated from its commercial activities for
the first time.
• For the purpose of Joint Government, a Board of Commissioners
for the Affairs of India called Board of Control was created.
• This board was made of six people viz. the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, the Secretary of State, and four Privy Councillors
nominated by the King.
• The Secretary of the State was entitled as the President of the
Board of Control.
• This Board of control was empowered to control all matters of
civil or military government or revenues.
• The board was given full access to the company’s records. It had
the powers to send Governors to India and full authority to
alter them.
 Pitts India Act 1784
• Pitt’s India Act (1784), named for the British prime
minister William Pitt the Younger, established the dual
system of control by the British government and the
East India Company, by which the company retained
control of commerce and day-to-day administration
but important political matters were reserved
• Minister William Pitt the Younger’s India Act of 1784.
Its essence was the institution of a dual control.
• The directors were left in charge of commerce and as
political executants, but they were politically
superintended by a new Board of Control, the
president and the BOC.
• The directors dealt with the board through a secret
committee of three, but their dispatches to India could
be altered, vetoed, and dictated by the board.
• The governor-general could be recalled by the crown.
In India the governor’s council was reduced to three,
including the commander in chief, and by
an amending act he acquired the veto, which Warren
Hastings had missed so much.
• To remove the drawbacks of the Regulating act and to
make the administration of the company’s Indian
territories efficient and responsible, a series of
enquiries were made and measures were taken by the
British parliament during the next decade.
• This act set up a board of control in Britain through
which the British government could fully control the
company’s civil, military and revenue affairs in India.
• The company, however, continued to have the monopoly
of trade and the right to appoint and dismiss its own
officials. Thus a system of dual government of British India
by the British government and the company was set up.
• Governor-General was given the power to overrule his
council on important matters. Presidencies of Bombay and
Madras were brought under his authority and he was
made the commander-in-chief of all the British troops in
India, both of the company and of the British government.
 COD Vs BOC
• For political matters, the Board of Control was created
and for commercial affairs, the Court of Directors was
appointed.
• The Board of Control took care of civil and military
affairs. It comprised of 6 people:
– Secretary of State (Board President)
– Chancellor of the Exchequer
– Four Privy Councillors
• In this dual system of control, the company was
represented by the Court of Directors and the British
government by the Board of Control.
• The act mandated that all civil and military officers
disclose their property in India and Britain within two
months of their joining.
• The Governor-General’s council’s strength was reduced to
three members. One of the three would be the
Commander-in-Chief of the British Crown’s army in India.
 Significant Features
• This act made a distinction between the commercial and political
activities of the East India Company.
• For the first time, the term ‘British possessions in India’ was
used.
• This act gave the British government direct control over Indian
administration.
• The Company became subordinate to the British government
unlike as in the previous Regulating Act of 1773, where the
government only sought to ‘regulate’ matters and not take over.
• This act established the British Crown’s authority in the civil and
military administration of its Indian territories. Commercial
activities were still a monopoly of the Company.
 Draw Backs
• The act was deemed a failure because there was no clarity
on the boundaries between the company’s powers and
the government’s authority.
• The Governor-General had to serve two masters i.e. East
India Company and the British Crown
• There were no clear boundaries between the
responsibilities of the Board of Control and the Court of
Directors of the company. The Governor-General had to
take on the spot decisions exercising his discretion.
 Cossijurah case
• The Cossijurah case raised the defects of charter of
1774 which created the Supreme Court at Calcutta.
• The Cossijurah case raised the defects of charter of
1774 which created the Supreme Court at Calcutta.
• The Charter did not specify either the jurisdiction of
the Court or the position of the Governor-General-in-
Council.
• As a result of this confusion, there were occasions of
conflicts between Supreme Court and the Council.
• In the Cossijurah case the confrontation between
Supreme Court and the Council became evident to the
highest degree.
• Raja Subramaniam, Zamindar of a Cossijurah was under a
heavy debt of Cossinaut Babu. Although several methods
were undertaken by Cossinaut to recover his debt from
Raja Subramaniam, he was not able to recover his money.
• As Cossinaut had no other option/recourse left he knocked
the doors of the judiciary. He filled a case against Raja
Subramaniam by instituting a civil suit in The Supreme
Court. A Writ of Capias by the court to arrest The Raja. As
the Raja being scared of writ hid.
• The council released an advisory that all landholders
need not pay attention to the Supreme Court process
until and unless they were serving the company or
accepted the Court’s jurisdiction by their consent.
• The Raja was informed in particular about the advisory
and therefore his people drove away the Supreme
Court sheriff when he came with the writ to arrest the
Raja.
• The Supreme Court issued another writ of
Sequestration, on the 12th of November 1779 to seize
the Raja’s house, to force him to appear before the
supreme court.
• The Raja was imprisoned by the officials and in doing
so they outraged the holy sanctum of the house.
• Meanwhile, Colonel Ahumty – Commander of the British
Armed Forces of India was ordered by The Governor-
General and the Council to arrest the Sheriff and release
the Raja.
• On the 3rd of December 1779, the sheriff was arrested
and confined for three days and sent to Calcutta as a
prisoner.
• Finally, the sheriff was released under the council’s
instructions. Later, Cossinaut Babu instituted a case against
the Governor-General, which he refused to accept as he
was on official duty.
• The Council declared that the interest of the natives would be
protected at all costs. The army Officials declared that the
Supreme Court Officials could not issue writ’s to the Council
members.
• The Judges of the Supreme Court felt insulted as a natural as
their authority was undermined. The Supreme Court took an
action against North Naylor the companies attorney General As
the council member could not be served writ’s.
• North Naylor was sentenced to prison with no bail application
provision, as the punishment was exemplary. The Council
members still had to undergo civil action.
 Questions Raised in Cossijurah Case
• The Cossijurah Case raised two important questions,
whether the Zamindars came under the Supreme
Court Jurisdiction.
• Who was the competent authority to decide this case?
• To resolve the many defects of the Supreme Court acts
the Parliament was compelled to pass The Act of
Settlement (1781)
 Case Of Kamaluddin (1775):
• The case of Kamaluddin was the first case to display an
open conflict between the Governor-General-in-Council
and the Supreme court regarding the jurisdiction of
various subjects.
• According to the facts of this case, Kamaluddin was
holding a salt farm in Hugli (Bengal) which originally
belonged to another person named Kanta Babu.
Kamaluddin was just an ostensible holder of the farm and
was holding the farm on the behalf of Kanta Babu.
• Kamaluddin was imprisoned because he was issued a
writ to his committal to the prison without bail by the
Revenue Council. He was in the prison without bail
because arrears of revenue was due from his side in
1775.
• In such cases at that time, it was according to the
custom to release the imprisoned persons on bail.
Later, the defendant, i.e., Kamaluddin appealed in the
supreme court for a writ of Habeas Corpus.
• Supreme court headed by chief justice Elijah Impey
gave its decision in the favour of the defendant and
Kamaluddin was set free by the court on bail after he
obtained the writ of Habeas Corpus.
• The court, in its judgement, held that the defendant, in
the cases of disputed accounts, should be granted bail
till the inquiry regarding his obligation to pay is
completed and he is found liable.
• As expected, Supreme council headed by Warren Hastings,
the Governor General expressed its dissatisfaction on the
judgement of Supreme court.
• The Council stated that the supreme council had its
jurisdiction over the officers of Calcutta Revenue Council
as the company was Diwan of the territories of Bengal,
Orissa and Bihar and the court was not empowered to
judge a matter related to the revenue.
• Therefore, according to the council, the court had no
power to issue a writ of Habeas corpus to the defendant
and grant him bail.
• However, Elijah Impey, Chief Justice of the Court,
opposed the view of the council.
• He stated that the revenue officers were also the
servant of the company and therefore, on this ground,
the jurisdiction over the revenue officers can be
claimed by the supreme court.
• Again, the council expressed its dissatisfaction on the view
of supreme court and 4 out of 5 members of the supreme
council decided to order the provincial Council to put the
defendant again in the prison without paying attention to
any of the orders of the Supreme Court.
• But, Warren Hastings, the Governor General didn't pay any
heed to these decisions and hence, they couldn't be
implemented.
 Patna Case
• The Patna Case took place in years of 1777, 1778 and
1779. The Patna Case took eminent place in the Indian
legal history because it had revealed the system judicial
administration.
• This case brought the light on the involving conflict and
dissatification among the Supreme court and the supreme
council. This case had made as the lesson learned that had
became the basis of the more further reorganization or
reorientation in the operation or management of justice
that will taken in future.
• Shabaz Beg Khan came to India and settled at Patna.
He married Naderah Begum and earned a large
amount of money.
• In December 1776 he died at Patna without leaving
any male or female as his heirs. He left behind a large
sum of money and property. Shahbaz did not have any
issue; he called Bahadur his nephew to live with him at
the time when he was alive.
• Bahadur was living with him after the death of
Shahbaz in 1776 his widow and nephew came into
open conflict and litigation began between them. Each
of them climbing the whole property. Nadirah claimed
property as the widow of the deceased.
• Bahadur stated that as an adopted son he was living
with the deceased and this being his legal heir after his
death. Bahadur took his first step and presented an
application before provisional council at Patna.
• Law officers Kazi and Mufti directed the case and
passed orders for the custody of property collected in
one place under the name of legal justice.
• Widow took shelter in dargah. He also requested the
court to protect the property from being abused by
the widow of the deceased. The Nadirah Begum
designates the Mohammedan Native Law officers i.e.
Mufti and Kazi to find out his claim in the property.
• Compatibility of the Provincial Council’s orders, the Kazi
and Mufti went house of the deceased and gathered the
property and took stock of it. During the investigation they
abused Nadirah Begum as a result of which she left the
house and took shelter in a “Dargah”.
• The widow Nadirah Begum,then again, asserted her claim
to the said property on the basis of three documents are:
Dower – Deed (Meharnama)
Gift – Deed (Hibanama)
Acknowledgment (Ikrarnama)
• Further, when the case was before the court, it was argued
that the dower was already paid by the deceased to his
Begum during his lifetime, a sum of Rs.1200 and her
counsel had neglected to submit the dower deed.
• It was further contended that the other two documents,
the gift deed and the acknowledgement, were forged
documents and therefore the share of the property should
be divided into two shares; one should be given to the
nephew and the remaining share to the Begum as per the
Muslim law of succession.
• The Provincial Council also gave its decision in favor of
the nephew by looking into the report of the Kazi and
Mufti.
• However, aggrieved by this decision, the Begum
approached the Sadar Diwani Adalat of Calcutta and
she also filed a suit against the Kazi and Mufti for
assault, battery, other injuries and alleged the
damages of rupees six lakhs.
 Mayor’s Court under charter 1726 and 1753
(Its genesis, working and defects
• Mayor court was established under charter 1687 and 1726
both have different aspects. The charter of 1600 permitted
constrained administrative power on the organisation to
makes laws, statute and so forth..
• These laws were to be sensible and ought not be opposite
or disgusting to the laws, statutes or traditions of England.
• The organisation was permitted to attempt devotion cases
and could force fines and detainment.. The organisation
had no energy to manage capital offences and to grant
capital disciplines (capital punishment and life
detainment).
• The organisation was denied with forces to control capital
offences like murder, revolt and so on.
• On higher courts in charter 1726 granted the Judicial force
to the organisation to make laws, to rebuff workers and so
on with the goal that the working of organisation does not
stop and friends does not confront misfortune.
• To keep up train among its workers, the Crown issued
Royal Commission to execute military law. Under 1726 it is
applied all presidency towns and only civil jurisdiction is
applicable.
 The Charter of 1726
• The charter of 1726 provided for the establishment of a corporation in
each presidency town. The charter is considered to be an important
landmark in the history of legal system in India as it introduced the
English laws into the country.

• The Charter of 1726 created Mayor’ Courts at all the three

presidencies that is Madras, Calcutta and Bombay thus, for the first
time, establishing a uniform judicial system.
 GENESIS OF THE CHARTER
• Political and commercial activities of the company
were increasing day by day.
• Absence of competent court in India.
• Many occasions arose when decisions of the courts in
India were questioned or contested in the British
courts.
• Need to create uniform rules and system in
corporations of all presidency towns.
• Charter issued to the company by king George I on the
24th sept.1726.
• Introduced uniformity of approach in all three
presidencies.
 Legislative powers
• Established a local legislature in each presidency town.
• The Governor-in-Council of each presidency town was
entrusted with powers to make by-laws, rules and
regulations for better administration in the
corporations and settlements with the prior approval
of the Board of Directors.
• Charter of 1726 for the first time created a subordinate
legislative authority in each of the three presidency
town of India
• Each presidency town was to have a Corporation
consisting a Mayor and nine Aldermen.
• The Mayor was to hold for a year and was to be
continued as Aldermen thereafter.
• Every year the Mayor was to be elected from amongst
the Aldermen by the Aldermen and out going Mayor.
• A vacancy amongst Aldermen was to be filled by the
Mayor and the Aldermen from the principal
inhabitants of the town.
 Changes in Judicial system
• The Governor-in-Council was empowered to dismiss or
remove any Aldermen on reasonable cause.
• The Charter Established Civil and Criminal Courts in the
Presidency Towns.
• The charter constituted a Mayor’s Court for each of
the presidency.
• These courts designated as the Royal courts and
source of authority was crown, who was regarded as
the fountain of justice.
• The charter also initiated the system of appeals from
the courts in India to King-in-Council or Privy council in
England.
• Bridge between English and Indian legal system.
 Civil / Criminal
• Civil Mayor Court: 9 Aldermen (7+2) Sherrif
• Criminal: Governor and 5 Council Members
• Two Aldermen could be subjects of any prince of state
in amity with great Britain seven Aldermen had to be
the natural born subjects of the Crown.
• In each presidency town the Mayor and two Aldermen
were to constitute the mayor’s Court.
• The quorum of the court was to be there
• Court was to have authority to hear and try all Civil
suits arising with in the town and subordinate
factories.
 CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
• Criminal jurisdiction in each presidency town was
vested in the Governor and five senior members in the
Council.
• Each of them individually acted as a justice of peace
their respective division.
• A justice of peace could arrest persons accused of
committing crimes, punish those who guilty of minor
crimes
• They hold quarter sessions four times a year to try and
punish criminals except high reasons.
• All technical forms and procedure of the England
criminal justice were introduced in the Presidency
towns.
 Charter 1753
• To put an end to the administrative problems and
disputes in presidency towns in between Governor and
Mayor court.
• Changes
• Aldermen were to be appointed by the Governor and
Council.
• The Mayor, the Governor and Council were to select
one out of a panel of two names of Aldermen
submitted by the corporation every year.
• Dismissal power of Aldermen also vested with the
Governor and council.
• The Mayor Court lost much of its former autonomy
and independence.
• The Mayor Court was debarred from entertaining a
case and action between the natives.
• Until both parties accepted to approach Mayor Court.
• Mayor’s Court was specially empowered to hear suits
against the Company.
• Court of Requests
• To decided cases cheaply, summarily and quickly, cases
up to 15 rupees
• To help poor litigants with small claims who could not
pay the expenses at Mayor’s Court.
• The court was to sit once a week and was to be
manned by 8-24 commissioners.
• Half of the commissioners were to be retire every year
and places were to be filled in by the ballot by the
remaining commissioners.
• Three commissioners were to sit by rotation on every
court day.
Warren Hastings: Judicial Plans of 1772, 1774
and 1780
• Till the middle of the 18th century, the Company held under it
only three presidency towns of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay.
• As time passed, the company expanded its political activities and
brought new territories surrounding the presidency towns under
its control. This territory came to be known as the moffusil.
• The first territorial acquisition of the company consisted of
Bengal, Bihar and Orissa.
• Here the first adalat system was started in 1772. Warren Hastings
introduced the new judicial administration system as well as a
revenue collection system in the year 1772 It laid the Foundation
of Adalat system.
 Judicial Plan of Warren Hastings 1772
• Warren Hastings Administrative plan divided territory of Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa into number of Districts.
• In each District an English servant of the company was appointed
as a Collector who was to be responsible for the collection of
land revenue. Establishment of Mofussil Diwani Adalat As per
Warren Hastings’ plan a Mofussil Diwani Adalat was established
in every district with collector as the Judge.
• The court was authorized to decide all civil cases like disputes
regarding properties, inheritance, marriage, caste, debts,
disputed accounts, contracts, partnerships and demands of rent.
• Wherever possible religious laws of Muslim as well as
Hindus were followed and applied .E.g. Caste,
marriage, inheritance etc.
• As the English servant who was appointed as Collector
did not understand the religious laws , Kazis and
Pundits were appointed to help him The decisions of
the Mofussil Diwani Adalat in cases up to Rs.500 were
final.
• Establishment of Small Cause Adalat – This Adalat
decided petty cases up to Rs. 10 .
• The Head farmer of the Pergunnah became the judge.
• This system was designed to save the traveling
expenses of poor farmers, as they did not need to
travel to the district place for justice.
 Establishment of Mofussil Fozdari Adalat:
• In every district a mofussil nizamat or fozdari adalat was
established to try all criminal cases.
• The adalat consisted of the Muslim kazi, mufti and moulvies. The
moulvies interpreted the Muslim law of crimes. The Kazi and
Mufti gave fatwa and render judgment.
• In this adalat collector exercise general supervision over the
Adalat, and saw that no corruption was made in the case. The
judgment was given impartially.
• This Fozdari adalat was not allowed to handle cases where
punishment was death sentence or forfeiture of property of the
accused. Such cases went to Sadar Nizamat Adalat for final
orders.
 Establishment of Sadar Adalats
• Firstly two courts were established namely Mofussil
Diwani Adalat and Mofussil Fozdari Adalat
• Over them 2 superior courts were established namely
Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat.
• The sadar diwani adalat consisted of Governor and
members of the council and was to hear appeals from
the mofussil diwani adalat in the cases over 500 Rs.
• The first sitting of the Sadar Diwani adalat was held on
the 17th March, 1773.
• On each appeal fee of 5 percent was charged.
• The appeals were to be filed in the Adalat within 2
months from the date of the judgment, decree given
by the Mofussil Adalat.
 Establishment of Sadar Nizamat Adalat
• Sadar Nizamat Adalat consisted of an Indian judge
known as Daroga-i-adalat who was to be assisted by
the chief Kazi, chief mufti and 3 moulvies.
• Nawab appointed all these persons as per the advice
of the Governor.
• In case of death sentence punishment, the death
warrant was made by the Adalat and signed by the
Nawab as the Head of Nizamat.
• The governor and council supervised this adalat to
control and reduce the corruption.
• All cases were heard in the open court.
• All courts were ordered to maintain registers and
records.
• Any case older than 12 years was not accepted. District
courts forwarded their records to the Sadar adalat
 Plan of 1774
• With this plan collectors were recalled from every district.
• In place of Collector an Indian officer was appointed called
as Diwan or amil. Diwan got the power to collect the
revenue as well as act as a judge in the Mofussil diwani
adalat.
• The territory of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa was divided into
six divisions with their headquarters at Calcutta, Burdwan,
Murshidabad, Dinajpore, Dacca and Patna In each division
many districts were created.
• The complete Bihar came under the Patna Division A
provincial Council consisting of four or five English
servants of the company were appointed in each
division to supervise the collection of revenue and to
hear appeals from the cases decided by the amil, the
Indian diwan.
• The Provincial Council was a link between the Mofussil
Diwani Adalat and the Sadar Diwani Adalat.
• While in the Plan of 1772, appeals from the mofussil
diwani adalats lay to the Sadar Diwani Adalat in all cases
over Rs. 500, now all cases decided by the amils
irrespective of their value were appealable to the
Provincial Council.
• This time also Warren Hastings knew that the Provisional
council will do more harm and more corruption than the
Collectors. Warren Hastings considered this plan as a
temporary plan but the Regulating Act was passed at this
time and Warren Hasting could not change the plan until
year 1780
 Judicial Plan of 1780, First Indian Civil Code
Prepared
• Warren Hastings knew that the judicial plan of 1774 was
not perfect, and when Warren Hastings again got the
chance, he made changes to the judicial plan of 1774.
• On April 11, 1780 new plan was introduced. As per the
plan of 1780 judicial and executive functions were
separated.
• Adalats – Function to do civil justice, no revenue work
Provincial Council - No judicial work, only revenue related
work, collection and revenue cases.
• But with this plan the problem was that, the area was vast
and adalats were few to administer those large areas,
because of this, cases were more, time was limited with
the judges and thus arrears piled up in every adalat.
• Second problem was that witnesses had to travel lot to
reach the adalats For eg. There was only one Adalat in the
whole of Bihar. Because of this people thought it better
not to file the cases in courts, as filing cases in court meant
delayed justice, physical harassment, waste of time and
money.
• As per the judicial plan cases up to Rs.100 were referred to
the person who stayed near the place of litigant ,but
before this it was compulsory to file the case in the Adalat,
and Second problem was that the person who worked as
judges has to work as a honorary judge and did not get any
salary .
• The Zamindar or public officer acted as an honorary judge
and they charged money for this and also zamindar got the
chance to do corruption as he became the honorary judge
 Lord Cornwallis Plan of 1787

✓ All revenue and judicial functions were vested with the Collector.
✓ The Collector would collect the revenue and decide all disputes relating to
collection of land revenue in his district.
✓ The ‘Mal Adalat’ or ‘revenue court’ was his office for revenue matters.
✓ An appeal against the decisions of the Collector went to the Board of
Revenue, and a second appeal lay with the Governor-General and Council.
✓ ‘Diwani Adalat’ was established for deciding civil disputes in each district,
and the Collector was its sole judge.
✓ Appeals from the Diwani Adalat went to the Sadar Diwani Adalat in matters
worth Rs.1000 or more, and a further second appeal was allowed to the King-in-
Council in matters exceeding £5000 in value.
✓ A Registrar was appointed for the assistance of the Collector and heard cases
up to Rs. 200 in value upon being referred to by the Collector.
 PLAN OF 1790
• FEATURES
✓ Three types of courts in decreasing order of hierarchy were
established in the Mofussil area: the Sadar Nizamat Adalat, the
Circuit Court and the Court of the District Magistrate.
✓ The District Magistrate could arrest criminals, took evidence
against them and then committed them to the Circuit Court for
trial.
✓ He could however punish the criminal upto 15 Rattans or 15
days of imprisonment in small crimes.
✓ He had to maintain all records and charts to be examined by
the Circuit Courts about the work done and people awaiting trial.
• ✓ The court visited every district twice a year.
✓ It was assisted by a Kazi and a Mufti for expounding
the law and proposing Fatwa.
✓ The court gave its punishment on these FatFatwas
• ✓ Blood Money was abolished.
✓ Cruel punishments were abolished.
✓ Salaries and allowances of the judges and native
officers was increased in order to check corruption.
 PLAN OF 1793
• FEATURES
✓ The judicial powers of the Collector were divested, and
he was left only with the power to collect land revenue.
✓ By Regulation III, section 10, all executive officers,
including the Collector were made amenable to the
jurisdiction of the courts personally.
✓ The liability of the government for the wrongs
committed by itself and its officers during the course of
their duties was for the first time recognised.
✓ The Court fee which had been imposed by Warren
Hastings was abolished.
 JUDICIAL REFORMS OF LORD BENTINCK
• Abolition of circuit courts.
• Power of sadr ameens, district and city judges increased.
• Establishment of sadr nijamat and sadr diwani adalat at
Allahabad.
• Practice of sati declared an offence.
• Indian appointed judicial officers.
• Abolition of provincial courts of appeals.
• Civil and revenue jurisdiction given to collector.