The establishment of Mayor's Courts' in Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta by the East India Company in 1726 marks the beginning of a common law system based on recorded judicial precedents. With the transformation of the Company from a trading company to a ruling power, new elements of the judicial system replaced the existing Mughal legal system. In this article, we will study the Development of Judicial System in British India and the important reforms in the judiciary made which will be helpful for UPSC exam preparation.

Judiciary System - Background

• The judicial system in pre-colonial India—in the Mughal era or even prior to that (including the ancient period)—neither adopted proper procedures nor had proper organisation of the law courts—in a regular gradation from the highest to the lowest—nor had any proper distribution of courts in proportion to the area to be served by them.
• The majority of Hindu litigation was decided by caste elders, village panchayats, or zamindars.
• The qazi—an office held by religious people—was the unit of judicial administration for Muslims, and it was located in provincial capitals, towns, and qasbas (large villages).
• The rajas and badshahs were regarded as the source of justice, and the process of dispensing justice could be arbitrary.

Reforms under Warren Hastings (1772- 1785)

• District Diwani Adalats, headed by a collector, were created in districts to resolve civil issues involving Hindu law and Muslim law.
• The Sadar Diwani Adalat heard the appeal from the District Diwani Adalats.
• District Fauzdari Adalats were established to hear criminal cases and were supervised by an Indian officer with the help of qazis and muftis. These adalats were likewise under the collector's general oversight. Fauzdari Adalats were used to administer Muslim law.
• The Sadar Nizamat Adalat at Murshidabad, commanded by a deputy Nizam (an Indian Muslim) and aided by the chief qazi and top mufti, was in charge of capital punishment and property acquisition.
• A Supreme Court was formed in Calcutta under the Regulating Act of 1773, with the authority to judge all British subjects inside Calcutta and the subordinate factories, including Indians and Europeans. It was a court with both original and appellate jurisdiction.

Reforms under Cornwallis (1786-1793)

• Lord Cornwallis took over as Governor-General from Warren Hastings in 1786. In the years 1787, 1790, and 1793, he instituted judicial reforms.
• The Judicial Plan of 1787, 1790, and 1793 was the name given to these reforms.

Judicial Plan of 1787

• The 1787 Judicial Plan merged the tax and judicial administrations and placed them under one authority, the Collector.
• The Collector, an English serf, was given the authority to collect revenue and adjudicate cases involving revenue disputes.
  • For streamlining the revenue administration, the number of districts in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa was reduced from 36 to 23.
• In each area, Lord Cornwallis erected Mal Adalats. These were the revenue courts, which dealt solely with revenue issues. The Collector, who was in charge of revenue matters, presided over the court.
  • The Board of Tax in Calcutta and afterwards the Governor-General-in-Council heard appeals from these revenue courts.
• In addition, the Collector presided over District Diwani Adalats, which dealt with civil disputes.
• To decide petty civil issues, a new office of the Registrar, sometimes known as the Registrar court, was established as a subordinate office to the Collector. The Registrar's order, however, was not final until it was signed by the Collector.

Judicial Plan of 1790

• Lord Cornwallis changed the way criminal justice was administered in 1790. Calcutta, Dacca, Murshidabad, and Patna were the four divisions he reformed.
• The District Fauzdari Courts were disbanded, and Circuit Courts were established in their place. Circuit courts were established in Calcutta, Murshidabad, Dacca, and Patna, and they were presided over by European judges.
• These courts serve as appeals courts for both civil and criminal cases.
• The highest court of criminal appeal, the Sadar Nizamat Adalat, was relocated to Calcutta and placed under the supervision of the Governor-General and members of his council.

Judicial Plan of 1793

• Lord Cornwallis continued to modernize the court system in 1793.
• Mal Adalats, which dealt solely with tax disputes and were presided over by Collectors as judges, were no longer in use. All of these revenue courts' pending cases and powers were transferred to the District Diwani Adalats.
• The Cornwallis Code of 1793 established a clear line between revenue and judicial administration. The Collector was now exclusively in charge of revenue administration and had no judicial powers.
• The District, City, or Zilla Court was renamed after the District Diwani Adalat.
• The District Judge's office was created to preside over the District courts and perform magisterial powers.
• For both Hindu and Muslim laws, a gradation of civil courts was developed, as follows:
• The Indian officials presided over the Munsiff's Court.
• The Registrar's Court is overseen by a European Judge.
• The District Judge is in charge of the District Court.
• The provincial courts of appeal are divided into four circuit courts.
• Calcutta's Sadar Diwani Adalat.
• For appeals of 5,000 pounds or more, the King-in-Council must be consulted.
• The Cornwallis Code established the following principles:
  • There was a separation of revenue and justice administration;
  • European subjects were also brought under jurisdiction;
  • Government officials were held accountable in civil courts for actions taken in their official capacity;
  • The principle of sovereignty of law was established.

Reforms under William Bentinck (1828-1833)

• The four Circuit Courts were disbanded under Governor-General William Bentinck's term. Their responsibilities were handed to the Collector, who was overseen by the commissioner of revenue and circuit.
• For the comfort of the people of the upper provinces, William Bentinck established Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat at Allahabad.
• Previously, Persian was the court's official language. However, the court proceedings could now be conducted in Persian or vernacular languages. The Supreme Court's proceedings are now conducted entirely in English.

Charter Act of 1833

• The Indian Law Commission, chaired by Lord Macaulay, was established under the Charter Act of 1833 for the compilation of Indian laws.
• The Code of Civil Procedure (1859), the Indian Penal Code (1860), and the Criminal Procedure Code (1862) were all drafted in response to the law commission's recommendations.

Establishment of High Courts

• The two sets of courts were in charge of dispensing justice in India from 1834 to 1861.
• The Supreme Court and the Sadar Adalats are two different courts with separate jurisdictions.
• Following the passage of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Indian Penal Code, and the Criminal Procedure Code in 1859, 1860, and 1861, respectively, the British government's next move was to impose uniformity in the administration of justice, which was accomplished in 1861.

The Indian High Court Act of 1861

• The Indian High Court Act of 1861 was passed by the British government in August 1861.
• In the presidencies of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, the Act established three High Courts.
• The goal of this statute was to bring the three presidencies' Sadar Adalats and Supreme Courts together.
• As a result, the Supreme Court and Sadar Adalats in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras were abolished by the Act, and each of these presidencies was replaced with a High Court.
• A Chief Justice and up to 15 regular judges make up each High Court.
• The High Court of Calcutta's Charter was issued in May 1862, while the High Courts of Bombay and Madras' Charters were issued in June 1862. As a result, the Calcutta High Court became the country's first High Court.
• The High Court for the North-Western Province was established at Agra in March 1866, replacing the Sadar Adalat, thanks to the Indian High Court Act of 1861, which allowed the Crown to create any other High Court within British India.
• This High Court relocated to Allahabad in 1869. As a result, the Allahabad High Court became the country's first provincial High Court.
• More High Courts were established afterwards. Patna High Court was established in February 1916.
• The Punjab High Court was formed in Lahore in 1919, and after independence, it was relocated to Shimla in 1947, and then to Chandigarh in 1955.

India's Federal Court and Supreme Court

• The Government of India Act of 1935 established the Federal Court, which had the power to resolve federal disputes between administrations.
• In 1937, the Federal Court was established in Delhi, with a Chief Justice and no more than six judges.
• The court had jurisdiction in three areas: original, appellate, and advisory. It was created with the sole purpose of resolving disputes between provinces and federal states, as well as hearing restricted appeals from the High Courts.
• It gives the governor-general of India an advised opinion under its advisory jurisdiction.
• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London might hear appeals from the Federal Court.
• Following India's independence, the federal court was renamed the Supreme Court of India.
• The Abolition of Privy Council Jurisdiction Act was passed by the Constituent Assembly in 1949 to eliminate the Privy Council jurisdictions.
• The Supreme Court was established on January 28, 1950, to replace the Federal Court of India and the Privy Council's judicial committee. As a result, the Supreme Court was elevated to the highest court in the Indian legal system.

Evaluation of Judiciary

Positive Aspects

• The rule of law was established.
• Codified laws replaced the rulers' religious and personal laws.
• Even European subjects were brought under the jurisdiction, though criminal cases could only be tried by European judges.
• Government servants were made answerable to civil courts.

Negative Aspects

• The judicial system became increasingly complicated and costly. The wealthy have the ability to manipulate the system.
• There was plenty of room for deception, deception, and chicanery.
• Protracted litigation meant that justice was delayed.
• As litigation increased, the courts became overburdened.
• Often, European judges were unfamiliar with Indian customs and traditions.

Conclusion

We can say that initially, Indian law was guided by custom and religious books, which evolved over time to secular legal systems and common law. It is worth noting that the ruling classes influenced the entire evolution of the Indian judiciary. For example, from ancient legal literature to Delhi Sultanate arbitration, then to Mughal arbitration, and finally to despotic English arbitration (British).

FAQs

Q1: When did the formal judicial system begin in British India?

Q2: What was the significance of the Regulating Act of 1773 in the development of the judicial system?

Q3: What changes did the Charter Act of 1833 bring to the judicial system of British India?

Q4: How did the Indian High Courts Act of 1861 impact the judiciary in British India?

Q5: What role did Warren Hastings play in the development of the judicial system in British India?

MCQs

1. Which of the following acts led to the establishment of the Supreme Court of Calcutta?

a) Charter Act of 1833

b) Regulating Act of 1773

c) Indian High Courts Act of 1861

d) Government of India Act, 1935

2. What was the primary purpose of the Indian High Courts Act of 1861?

a) To introduce the rule of law in British India

b) To establish High Courts in major presidency towns

c) To codify Indian laws

d) To abolish the East India Company

3. Who established civil and criminal courts in the districts of British India?

a) Lord Cornwallis

b) Warren Hastings

c) Lord Dalhousie

d) Lord Ripon

4. What was one of the key outcomes of the Charter Act of 1833 concerning the judiciary?

a) Creation of separate laws for different regions

b) Establishment of a Law Commission to codify Indian laws

c) Abolition of the Supreme Court of Calcutta

d) Introduction of universal suffrage

5. What did the Mayor’s Courts, established in 1726, signify in British India’s judicial system?

a) The beginning of the codification of Indian laws

b) The start of British-controlled judicial administration

c) The introduction of civil rights for Indians

d) The end of Mughal influence in legal matters

GS Mains Questions and Model Answers

Q1: "The development of the judicial system in British India laid the foundation for the modern judiciary in India." Discuss with reference to major reforms introduced during British rule.

Answer: The development of the judicial system in British India played a crucial role in shaping the modern judiciary of India. The first major step was the establishment of the Mayor’s Courts in 1726, marking the beginning of formal British judicial administration. The Regulating Act of 1773 further centralized the judiciary by establishing the Supreme Court of Calcutta, which ensured legal accountability for British officials and subjects.
The Charter Act of 1833 was another key reform that introduced a Law Commission to codify Indian laws, promoting uniformity across the country. The Indian High Courts Act of 1861 further reformed the judiciary by establishing High Courts in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, which streamlined the legal process and laid the foundation for the judicial structure that exists today. These reforms introduced concepts of the rule of law, separation of powers, and legal accountability, all of which have become essential components of India’s judicial system.

Q2: Evaluate the significance of the Charter Act of 1833 in the codification of laws in British India and its impact on the Indian judiciary.

Answer: The Charter Act of 1833 was a landmark legislation in the development of the judicial system in British India. One of its key provisions was the establishment of a Law Commission, which was tasked with codifying Indian laws. This codification process was crucial for creating a uniform legal framework across British India, as it replaced the diverse and often conflicting legal systems that had existed under previous regimes.
The codified laws ensured greater consistency and predictability in the administration of justice, which was an essential step toward the modern judicial system. The Charter Act of 1833 also empowered the Governor-General to implement legal reforms, making the judicial process more efficient and organized. The Act's emphasis on legal codification had a long-term impact on Indian jurisprudence, as it laid the groundwork for the unified legal system that exists in India today.

Q3: Discuss the evolution of the judicial system in British India and the role played by key figures like Warren Hastings and Lord Cornwallis in shaping it.

Answer: The evolution of the judicial system in British India was marked by several key developments and reforms introduced by figures like Warren Hastings and Lord Cornwallis. Warren Hastings, as Governor-General, laid the foundation for the judicial system by establishing civil and criminal courts at the district level. His reforms aimed to bring some level of organization and structure to the administration of justice, particularly in rural areas.
Lord Cornwallis further expanded on these reforms with the Cornwallis Code in 1793, which introduced the principle of judicial accountability and separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary. He restructured the courts, creating a hierarchy of civil and criminal courts, and introduced the concept of European judges overseeing cases involving British subjects and Indian citizens. These reforms not only centralized the judicial process but also introduced elements of fairness and legal accountability, which were critical in the development of the modern Indian judiciary.

Previous Year Questions on  Judiciary

1. UPSC CSE 2019

Q1: Discuss the role of the Regulating Act of 1773 in shaping the judicial system of British India. 

Answer: The Regulating Act of 1773 was a significant step in shaping the judicial system of British India. It established the Supreme Court of Calcutta, marking the beginning of centralized judicial authority under British rule. The Act sought to regulate the East India Company’s administration and brought its officials under legal accountability. The establishment of the Supreme Court ensured that British officials and subjects were subject to the rule of law, contributing to the formation of an organized judicial system. This court’s creation also laid the groundwork for later reforms, such as the Indian High Courts Act of 1861, which further developed the judicial infrastructure in India.

2. UPSC CSE 2020

Q2: Analyze the impact of the Indian High Courts Act of 1861 on the judicial system of British India. 

Answer: The Indian High Courts Act of 1861 had a profound impact on the judicial system of British India. It abolished the earlier Supreme Courts and Sadar Adalats and replaced them with High Courts in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras. This move streamlined the judiciary by ensuring uniformity in the administration of justice. The High Courts were empowered to administer civil and criminal law, enhancing the legal framework of the country. The Act also introduced more transparency and efficiency in the legal process, as it provided for a more accessible and centralized judicial authority. This reform laid the foundation for the modern judicial system in India.