UNIT-1

Q1 Establishment of East India Company

The first East India Company was incorporated in England under a Charter granted by
Queen Elizabeth on 31st December 1600. The company was given executive trading
right in Asia including India, Africa and America. The trading area so defined covered
almost every part of the world except Europe. No other British subject could trade in
this area without obtaining a licence from the company. The charter was granted for 14
years and it could be renewed for another 15 years only if it did not prejudicially effect
the Crown and its people. The company was managed by Court of Directors. The
members of the company in a general meeting, called “the court” elected annually a
Governor and twenty-four directors to look after and manage the affairs of the
Company. In early days the administration of justice in the settlement East India
Company was not a high order. There was no separation between the executive and
the judiciary the judiciary was under the control of the executive the judges were not a
law experts. The company gave lesser importance to the judicial independence fair
justice and rule of law

East India Company, English company formed for the exploitation of trade with East
and Southeast Asia and India, incorporated by royal charter on December 31, 1600.
Starting as a monopolistic trading body, the company became involved in politics and
acted as an agent of British imperialism in India from the early 18th century to the mid-19th
century. In addition, the activities of the company in China in the 19th century served as
a catalyst for the expansion of British influence there.

The company was formed to share in the East Indian spice trade. That trade had been a
monopoly of Spain and Portugal until the defeat of the Spanish Armada (1588)
by England gave the English the chance to break the monopoly. Until 1612 the company
conducted separate voyages, separately subscribed. There were temporary joint stocks
until 1657, when a permanent joint stock was raised.

The company met with opposition from the Dutch in the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia)
and the Portuguese. The Dutch virtually excluded company members from the East
Indies after the Amboina Massacre in 1623 (an incident in which English, Japanese, and
Portuguese traders were executed by Dutch authorities), but the company’s defeat of the
Portuguese in India (1612) won them trading concessions from the Mughal Empire. The
company settled down to a trade in cotton and silk piece goods, indigo, and saltpetre, with
spices from South India. It extended its activities to the Persian Gulf, Southeast Asia,
and East Asia.

Beginning in the early 1620s, the East India Company began using slave labour and
transporting enslaved people to its facilities in Southeast Asia and India as well as to the
island of St. Helena in the Atlantic Ocean, west of Angola. Although some of those
enslaved by the company came from Indonesia and West Africa, the majority came from
East Africa—from Mozambique or especially from Madagascar—and were primarily
transported to the company’s holdings in India and Indonesia. Large-
scale transportation of slaves by the company was prevalent from the 1730s to the early
1750s and ended in the 1770s.

After the mid-18th century the cotton-goods trade declined, while tea became an
important import from China. Beginning in the early 19th century, the company financed
the tea trade with illegal opium exports to China. Chinese opposition to that trade
precipitated the first Opium War (1839–42), which resulted in a Chinese defeat and the
expansion of British trading privileges; a second conflict, often called the Arrow War (1856–
60), brought increased trading rights for Europeans.

The original company faced opposition to its monopoly, which led to the establishment of
a rival company and the fusion (1708) of the two as the United Company of Merchants of
England trading to the East Indies. The United Company was organized into a court of 24
directors who worked through committees. They were elected annually by the Court of
Proprietors, or shareholders. When the company acquired control of Bengal in 1757, Indian
policy was until 1773 influenced by shareholders’ meetings, where votes could be bought
by the purchase of shares. That arrangement led to government intervention.
The Regulating Act (1773) and William Pitt the Younger’s India Act (1784) established
government control of political policy through a regulatory board responsible
to Parliament. Thereafter the company gradually lost both commercial and political
control. Its commercial monopoly was broken in 1813, and from 1834 it was merely a
managing agency for the British government of India. It was deprived of that role after
the Indian Mutiny (1857), and it ceased to exist as a legal entity in 1873.

The establishment of the East India Company (EIC) is a significant event in global history,
particularly for the history of British imperialism in Asia. Here's an in-depth overview of how
and why it was established:

1. Context in the Late 16th Century:

 • Global Trade Rivalry: By the late 16th century, European nations were in fierce
competition to control the lucrative spice trade, which was dominated by the
Portuguese in the East Indies (modern-day Indonesia). Spain, Portugal, the
Netherlands, and England were all striving to expand their influence in Asia.

• The Need for Trade: England, being an island nation with limited resources, was
eager to secure foreign markets and access exotic goods like spices, silk, tea, and
cotton, which were highly valued in Europe. The Portuguese and the Dutch already
had a presence in the East Indies, so England sought an alternative route to the
wealth of Asia.

2. Charter and Formation:

• Foundation in 1600: On December 31, 1600, Queen Elizabeth I granted a Royal

Charter to a group of London merchants, allowing them a monopoly on all English
trade in the East Indies for 15 years. This charter led to the establishment of the East
India Company, formally known as the "Governor and Company of Merchants of
London Trading into the East Indies."

• Early Organization: The company was initially a joint-stock company, which means
it was owned by shareholders who invested money to fund its trading ventures. This
model allowed the company to raise large sums of capital for its operations, and the
shareholders shared in the profits and risks of the enterprise.

3. Initial Challenges:

• Competition with the Dutch and Portuguese: The early years of the East India
Company were marked by fierce competition with the Dutch East India Company
(VOC) and the Portuguese. The Dutch had established a dominant position in the
spice trade, controlling key ports in the East Indies. The EIC had to find new markets
and trading partners.

• Establishing Trading Posts: Initially, the company’s main focus was on the spice
trade in Southeast Asia, but it soon turned its attention to India, where it saw greater
opportunities. By 1612, the company had established its first trading post in Surat,
India, after a naval victory over the Portuguese.

4. Expansion into India:

• Mughal Empire Relations: The EIC's success in India was largely due to its ability to
secure permission from the powerful Mughal Empire to trade in its territories. In
1615, Sir Thomas Roe, an envoy from King James I, negotiated favorable trade terms
with Mughal Emperor Jahangir, allowing the company to establish factories (trading
 posts) in key cities such as Surat, Madras (now Chennai), and Calcutta (now
Kolkata).

• Shift in Focus: As the EIC became more established in India, its focus shifted from
spices to textiles, particularly Indian cotton and silk. India became the company’s
primary area of operation, while Southeast Asia became less important.

5. Company’s Growing Power:

• Militarization and Political Influence: Over time, the EIC not only became a
powerful commercial entity but also acquired significant political and military
power. By the 18th century, the company had its own private army and was involved
in local Indian politics, often siding with or against various regional rulers.

• Battle of Plassey (1757): One of the pivotal moments in the company's history
came in 1757 when Robert Clive, an EIC officer, defeated the Nawab of Bengal in the
Battle of Plassey. This victory gave the company control over the rich province of
Bengal and marked the beginning of its transformation from a trading entity to a
colonial power in India.

6. Consolidation of British Rule:

• Expansion of Control: Over the next century, the EIC expanded its control over
large parts of India through diplomacy, military force, and alliances with local rulers.
It gradually established British dominance over the Indian subcontinent.

• British Government Involvement: Although the EIC remained a private company,

its activities were closely tied to British government interests. By the late 18th
century, the British government had started regulating the company’s activities
through acts of Parliament, recognizing its immense influence and the need for
oversight.

7. Decline and the End of the EIC:

• Indian Rebellion of 1857: The company's rule over India faced a major challenge
with the Indian Rebellion (also known as the Sepoy Mutiny) in 1857. This was a
widespread, but ultimately unsuccessful, uprising against British rule, fueled by
resentment towards the company’s policies and interference in Indian society.

• Dissolution in 1874: In the aftermath of the rebellion, the British Crown took direct
control of India through the Government of India Act of 1858, ending the EIC’s
political power. The company continued as a trading entity for a few more years, but
it was formally dissolved in 1874.
8. Legacy of the East India Company:

• The EIC’s impact on India and the world was profound. It played a central role in the
establishment of British colonialism in India and reshaped the economic and
political landscape of the region.

• Its practices also contributed to significant changes in global trade, including the
establishment of global trade networks and the shift in economic power towards
Europe during the early modern period.

Conclusion:

The establishment of the East India Company was a crucial moment in the history of British
colonial expansion. Originally formed as a commercial enterprise, the EIC transformed into
a powerful political and military force, shaping the future of India and British imperialism
for centuries. Its legacy remains controversial, as it was both a driver of economic growth
and a source of exploitation and conflict.

Q2 Early Development of Legal System in Surat. Madras, Bombay and Calcutta (1600-
1726).

The development of the legal system in British India, particularly in Surat, Madras, Bombay,
and Calcutta from 1600 to 1726, reflects the broader process of British colonial expansion
and the establishment of formal institutions to govern trade and maintain law and order.
Each of these locations played a pivotal role in the emergence of a British legal framework,
and the evolution of their legal systems was deeply intertwined with the East India
Company's interests and the changing political dynamics in India. Below is a detailed
account of the early development of the legal systems in these cities:

1. Surat (1600-1726):

Surat was one of the earliest centers of British trade in India, established as a key trading
post by the East India Company (EIC) in 1612. During the early years, the legal structure in
Surat was rudimentary, with the primary focus on securing trade privileges and protecting
British interests.

• Legal Authority: The early legal system in Surat was influenced by Mughal law, as
the city was under Mughal control. The East India Company’s officials operated
under the authority granted by the Mughal Emperor. They sought to resolve disputes
through negotiations with local Indian authorities and employed local customs to
maintain peace.
 • Early Courts: The Company did not establish a formal court system in Surat.
Disputes involving British merchants were initially resolved by the Company’s
agents or governors, and in cases of serious disputes, appeals were made to local
Mughal courts. As a result, there was no distinct British legal system in Surat during
this period.

• Decline of Surat: By the early 18th century, Surat’s importance as a British trading
hub declined as Bombay emerged as the primary center of British activities on the
west coast of India.

2. Madras (1600-1726):

The British East India Company established its presence in Madras (modern-day Chennai)
in 1639 when it obtained land from the local Nayak rulers. Madras quickly became a key
British settlement, and a more formal legal structure was developed to govern the growing
European population and interactions with local merchants.

• Formation of Courts: In 1678, a formal court of judicature was established in

Madras. It was presided over by the Company’s governor and council, who acted as
judges. The legal system was initially designed to address the needs of the European
community, but it gradually extended to include local Indian residents involved in
trade with the British.

• Introduction of English Law: The early legal system in Madras reflected a mixture of
English law and local customs. The court applied English common law in cases
involving British subjects, but it also took into account Indian customs and laws
when dealing with local residents.

• Growth of Legal Authority: By the early 18th century, Madras had a mayor’s court,
which was established in 1687. This court had civil and criminal jurisdiction and
was the first formal court system that began to resemble the later British judicial
structures in India. The mayor’s court marked a significant step in the consolidation
of British legal authority in the region.

3. Bombay (1600-1726):

The development of the legal system in Bombay began in 1661, when the British Crown
acquired the island of Bombay as part of the dowry from Portugal following the marriage of
Charles II to Catherine of Braganza. The East India Company subsequently leased Bombay
from the Crown in 1668.

• Early Legal Framework: Initially, Bombay’s legal system was primitive, with the East
India Company exercising legal authority through its appointed governors and
 officials. Much like in Madras, there was no distinction between executive, judicial,
and legislative functions in the early period, and justice was dispensed informally by
Company officials.

• The First Courts: In 1670, Gerald Aungier, the governor of Bombay, made efforts to
formalize the legal structure by establishing a court of judicature. This court,
consisting of Company officials, handled civil and criminal matters, applying
English law in cases involving Europeans, while taking local laws into account for
Indian litigants.

• Magistracy and Courts: In 1683, a more structured court system was introduced.
Aungier also initiated the appointment of justices of the peace to deal with minor
offenses and disputes. Bombay’s courts grew in significance as the city became a
major center for trade, and its legal system evolved to address the needs of an
increasingly diverse population, both European and Indian.

• Influence of English Law: By the early 18th century, the legal system in Bombay
had further developed with the establishment of a mayor’s court in 1726, similar to
the one in Madras. This court solidified the application of English law in Bombay,
particularly for British subjects, while still accommodating local customs in cases
involving Indian litigants.

4. Calcutta (1690-1726):

Calcutta (modern-day Kolkata) was founded by the East India Company in 1690 and
quickly grew into the most important British settlement in Bengal. The legal system in
Calcutta during this period mirrored the developments in Madras and Bombay, but with its
own unique features.

• Establishment of Courts: The first formal court in Calcutta was established in

1700, known as the "Zamindari Court." It was responsible for handling civil disputes
and administering justice under local Indian laws and customs, reflecting the fact
that Bengal was still under the nominal control of the Mughal Empire. The Company
officials operated within this legal framework, working in conjunction with local
authorities.

• Company’s Legal Authority: As Calcutta grew in importance, the East India

Company gradually asserted more control over legal matters. The establishment of
Fort William in 1696 provided a fortified base for the British, from which they could
extend their influence over surrounding areas. In 1726, a mayor’s court was
established in Calcutta under the Charter of 1726, which brought Calcutta’s legal
system more in line with that of Madras and Bombay.
 • English Law and Local Customs: The mayor’s court in Calcutta applied English law
to British subjects, but it also recognized the importance of local customs in cases
involving Indian litigants. This dual legal system reflected the complex and
multicultural nature of Calcutta, which was home to a diverse population of
Europeans, Indians, Armenians, and other communities involved in trade.

5. Charter of 1726: A Turning Point

The Charter of 1726 was a significant turning point in the legal history of British India, as it
provided a more structured and uniform judicial system across the three presidencies—
Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. The charter established mayor’s courts in each of these
cities, with jurisdiction over civil cases and appeals going to the governor and council. The
charter also introduced elements of English common law into the Indian legal system,
particularly in cases involving British subjects.

The early legal systems in Surat, Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta were thus characterized by
a mix of local customs and English law, with the East India Company gradually asserting its
authority over legal matters as its political and economic power expanded. By 1726, the
foundation had been laid for the more formalized British legal system that would dominate
India in the subsequent centuries.

Q3 Establishment of Mayor Court under 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.

Factors leading to the Establishment of Mayor’s Court:

Before 1726 there were different judicial system functioning in the British Settlement,
which were increased in number by 1726. As a result the servants of the many, working at
such different settlements were subject to different sets of courts. There was, thus a lack
of uniformity in the British settlements, for the same offence wild entail different and
sometimes Contrary Penal Consequence. There was also another factor which compelled
the Company to have a uniform law.
There were quite important distinguishing feature between the Company’s Mayer’s Court
and the Crown’s Mayor’s Courts established under the Charter of 1726. The main
differences are given below,

(1) The Mayor’s Court under the Charter of 1687 was created by the Company while the
Mayor’s Courts under the Charter of 1726 drew their power directly from the Crown. Thus
the latter were on a superior footing than the former

(2) The Charter of 1687 created only one Mayor’s Court at Madras, it did not touch the
judicial system prevailing in other settlements, presidencies under the Company.

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.

(3) The Mayor’s Court established under the Charter of 1687 enjoyed both civil and criminal
jurisdiction. While the mayor’s courts established under the Charter of 1726 were given
jurisdiction in civil matters including testamentary and probate of wills jurisdiction,
Criminal matters were left to be decided by am within the jurisdiction of, Governor-in-
Council which acted as a court in such matters.

(4) The Charter of 1726 made, for the first time, a provisions for a second appeal to the
King-in-Council which became a precursor of the Privy Council later on. Thus under this
Charter, the first appeal could be filed before the Governor-in-Council and the second
(although in some cases) appeal could be taken to the King-in-Council in England. The
Charter of 1687 did not make such provision. The appeal from the Mayor’s court could be
filed before the Admiralty Court.

(6) No doubt, the Crown’s Mayor’s Courts established under the charter of 1726 were
definitely superior courts so far as their status is concerned, but in strict judicial and legal
manner, the Company’s Mayor’s Court was better equipped, for there was a provision for a
lawyer-member who was to be called the Recorder. The Charter of 1726 although it
purported to improve the judicial system in India, did not make any such provision. Thus
the Courts established in 1726 were mostly composed of Company’s civil servants who did
not have sufficient experience in legal matters.

(7) There was yet another important distinction between the two Mayor’s Courts. The
Company’s Mayor Court evolved its own procedure and dispensed justice in accordance
with the rules of common sense, equity and good conscience. It avoided the intricate
procedural technicalities. But the Charter of 1726 which introduced the British laws into
India brought all the legal technicalities of the British Courts of law.
Thus the entire gamut of British laws and its procedure were foisted on the Courts
established under the Charter of 1726.

(8) The Charter of 1726, in a way, did away with the concept of separation between the
executive and the judiciary in criminal matters. The Governor-in-Council acted as the
criminal court while the Mayor’s Courts handled only the civil matters and testamentary
and probate of wills cases. On the other hand, the Mayor’s Court at Madras was invested
with power to handle all civil and criminal matters and appeals from its decisions went to
the Admiralty Court rather than the Governor-in-Council.

CONCLUSION:

The Charter of 1726 also constituted a Mayor’s Court for each of the presidency towns
consisting of a Mayor and nine Aldermen. Three of them i.e., the Mayor or senior Alderman
together with two other Aldermen were required to be present to form the quorum of the
Court. The Mayor’s Courts were declared to be present to fan the quorum of the Court. The
Mayor’s Courts were declared to be Courts of record and were authorized to try, hear and
determine all civil actions and pleas between party and party. The Court was also granted
testamentary jurisdiction in power to issue letters of administration to the legal heir of the
deceased person. It was authorized to exercise its jurisdiction over all persons living in the
presidency own and working in the Company’s subordinate factories.

Appeals from decisions of Mayor’s Court were filed in the Court of Governor and Council. A
second appeal in cases involving 1000 pagodas or more could be made to king-in-council
in England. The court of Governor and Council also decided criminal cases.

Q4 TRIAL OF RAJA NANDKUMAR (THE JUDICIAL MURDER) –

Raja Nand Kumar, a Hindu Brahmin was a big Zamindar and a very influential person of
Bengal. He was loyal to the English company ever since the days of Clive and was popularly
known as “black colonel” by the company. Three out of four members of the council were
opponents of Hastings, the Governor-General and thus the council consisted of two
distinct rival groups, the majority group being opposed to Hastings. The majority group
comprising Francis, Clavering and Monson instigated Nand Kumar to bring certain charges
of bribery and corruption against warren Hastings before the council whereupon Nand
Kumar in march, 1775 gave a latter to Francis, one of the members of the council
complaining that in 1772, Hastings accepted from him bribery of more than one Lakh for
appointing his son Gurudas, as Diwan. The letter also contained an allegation against
Hastings that he accepted rupees two and a half lakh from Munni begum as bribe for
appointing her as the guardian of the minor Nawab Mubarak-ud-Daulah. Francis placed his
letter before the council in his meeting and other supporter, monsoon moved a motion that
Nand Kumar should be summoned to appear before the Council. Warren Hastings who
was presiding the meeting in the capacity of Governor-General, opposed Monson’s motion
on the ground that he shall not sit in the meeting to hear accusation s against himself nor
shall he acknowledge the members of his council to be his judges. Mr. Barwell ,the alone
supporter member of Hastings ,put forth a suggestion that Nand Kumar should file his
complaint in the supreme court because it was the court and not the council ,which was
competent to hear the case. But Monson’s motion was supported by the majority hence
Hastings dissolved the meeting. Thereupon majority of the members objected to this
action of Hastings and elected Clavering to preside over the meeting in place of Hastings
.Nand Kumar was called before the council to prove his charges against Hastings. The
majority members of the council examined Nand Kumar briefly and declared that the
charges leveled against Hastings were proved and directed Hastings to deposit an amount
of Rs.3, 54,105 in treasury of the company, which he had accepted as a bribe from Nand
Kumar and Munni Begum. Hastings genuinely believed that the council had no authority to
inquire into Nand Kumar’s charges against him. This event made Hastings a bitter enemy of
Nand Kumar and he looked for an opportunity to show him down. FACTS OF THE CASE:-
Soon after, Nand Kumar was along with Fawkes and Radha Charan were charged and
arrested for conspiracy at the instance of Hastings and barwell. In order to bring further
disgrace to Raja Nand Kumar, Hastings manipulated another case of forgery against him at
the instance of one Mohan Prasad in the conspiracy case. The Supreme Court in its
decision of July 1775 fined Fawkes but reserved its judgment against Nand Kumar on the
grounds of pending fraud case. The charge against Nand Kumar in the forgery case was that
he had forged a bond in 1770. The council protested against Nand Kumar’s charge in the
Supreme Court but the Supreme Court proceeded with the case unheeded. Finally, Nand
Kumar was tried by the jury of twelve Englishmen who returned a verdict of ‘guilty’ and
consequently, the supreme court sentenced him to death under an act of the British
parliament called the Forgery Act which was passed as early as 1728. Serious efforts were
made to save the life of Nand Kumar and an application for granting leave to appeal to the
king-in-council was moved in the Supreme Court but the same was rejected. Another
petition for recommending the case for mercy to the British council was also turned down
by the Supreme Court. The sentence passed by the Supreme Court was duly executed by
hanging Nand Kumar to death on August 5, 1775.In this way, Hastings succeeded in getting
rid of Nand Kumar. CRITICAL APPRAISAL:- Chief Justice Impey in this case acted unjustly in
refusing to respite to Nand Kumar. No rational man can doubt that he took this course in
order to gratify the Governor-General. The trial of Nand Kumar disclosed that the institution
of Supreme Court hardly commanded any respect from the natives as it wholly unsuited to
their social conditions and customs. The trial has been characterized as “judicial murder”
of Raja Nand Kumar which rudely shocked the conscience of mankind. Raja Nand Kumar’s
trial was certainly a case of miscarriage of justice. The decision of the Supreme Court in the
trail of Raja Nand Kumar became a subject of great controversy and criticism for the
following reasons. a) Charge against Raja Nand Kumar was preferred shortly after he had
leveled charges against Warren Hastings. b) Chief justice Impey was a close friend of
Hastings. c) Every judges of the Supreme Court cross-examined the defense witness due to
which the whole defense of Raja Nand Kumar collapsed. It was also not legal according to
the rules of procedure prevailing at that time. d) After the trail, when Nand Kumar was held
guilty by the Court he filled an application before the Supreme Court for granting leave to
appeal to the King-in-Council but the court rejected this application without giving due
consideration. e) Nand Kumar applied for mercy to His Majesty but his case was not
forwarded by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was empowered by the Charter of
1774 to reprieve and suspend such capital punishment and forward the matter for mercy to
His Majesty. Earlier in 1765, a native, named Radha Charan Mittre was tried in Calcutta for
forgery and death sentence was passed. A petition was sent to Governor Spencer from the
native community of Calcutta requesting “either a reversal of sentence or a respite pending
an application to the throne”. The prayer was granted and Radha Charan got a free pardon
from the King. f) Nand kumar commited the offence of forgery nearly Five year ago, i.e.,
much before the establishment of the Supreme Court. Nand Kumar was sentenced to
death under the English Statute of 1729 on a charge of forgery but this Act was not
applicable to India. g) Under the Hindu Law or the Mohammedian Law, the offence of
forgery was not made punishable with death. In view of the peculiar feature of the trail, as
stated above, and the events which took place before the trail, the Judgment of the
Supreme Court in Raja Nand Kumar’s case became very controversial. The trail and
execution of Raja Nand Kumar shocked not only Indians but also foreigners residing in
India. It was considered most unfortunate and unjust. The role of chief Justice Impey
became a target of great criticism. On their return to England, Impey and Warran Hastings
were impeached by the House of Commons and the execution of Raja Nand Kumar was an
important charged leveled against them.

THE COSSIJURAH CASE (1779-80)

Raja surendernarain Zamindar of Cossijurah was under a heavy debt to KashinathBabu.

Though Kashinat Bab tried to recover the money from the Raja through the Board of
Revenue at Calcutta his efforts proved in vain. He therefore filed a civil suit against the Raja
of Cossijurah in the Supreme Court at Calcutta. He also file an affidavit on 13th August,
1777 stating that the Raja being a Zamindar, was employed in the collection of revenues
and was thus within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court issued a
writ of Capias for the Raja’s arrest. Being afraid of the arrest the Raja avoided service of writ
by hiding himself. The Collector of Midnapur, in whose district the Raja resided, informed
the Council about these developments. The Council, after seeking legal advice from its
Advocate-General, issued a notification informing all the Landholders that they need not
pay attention to the process of the Supreme Court unless they were either servants of the
Company or had accepted the Court’s jurisdiction by their own consent. The Raja was also
specially informed by the Council and, therefore, his people crave away the Sheriff of the
Supreme Court when that official came with a writ to arrest the Raja of Cossijurah. The
Supreme Court issued another writ of sequestration on 12th November, 1779 to seize the
property of the Raja in order to compel his appearance in the Supreme Court. This time the
Sherriff of Calcutta. With a force of sixty or seventy armed force men, marched to
Cossijurah in order to execute the writ, they imprisoned the Raja and it is said that the
Englishmen outraged the sanctity of the family idol. In the meantime, the Governor –
General and Council directed Colonel Ahmuty, commander of the armed forces near
Midnapur to intercept and arrest the Sheriff with his party and release the Raja from arrest.
Colonel Ahmuty sent Lieutenant Bamford with two companies of sepoysto arrest the
Sheriff with his party. On 3rd December, 1779 Bamford, with the help of Willaim Swanston,
arrested the Sheriff and his party while they were returning and kept them in confinement
for three days. Later on, they were sent to Calcutta as prisoners. Council released the
Sheriff’s party and directed Colonel Ahmutty to resist any further writ of the Supreme
Court.
 UNIT-2

Q1 The Regulating Act of 1773

The Regulating Act in 1773 (officially known as the East Indian Company Act 1772) been
enacted by the British Parliament to alter the East India Company's governance in India.

The East Indian Company had been in serious financial trouble by 1773. As this constituted
a monopolistic trade firm in India, and also many significant individuals were stockholders,
the corporation was crucial towards the British Raj. The Corporation paid £40,000 every
year to retain the monopoly, however, was unable to satisfy its obligations since 1768
leading to the decrease of tea shipments to America. Trying to smuggle Dutch teas made
up around 85% of any and all tea consumed in the United States.

The East India Corporation owed money to the Bank of England as well as the government,
which had 15 million pounds (7 million kilograms) of tea decaying in British storage, with
more in the way from India. This Tea Act 1773 complemented with Regulating Act 1773,
with the primary goal of reducing a significant amount of tea kept mostly by financially
distressed British East India Corporation inside its London storage and assisting the
financially suffering corporation in surviving.

History

• Well after founding in 1600, the British East India Company began dealing with
eastern countries

• The corporation acquired political influence over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa after the
War of Buxar in 1764

• Due to the growth of frontiers and enormous expenditures in numerous battles, the
firm had been in financial trouble

• When Lord North submitted his historic bill in the senate on May 18, 1773, this was
approved by British Parliament

• The British Parliament approved the Regulation Act (1773), which was the first major
step toward legislative authority over the Firm’s Indian government

Provisions of the Regulating Act, 1773

Listed below are the provision for the regulating act 1773,
 1. The Act confined the Board of Directors to four-year terms and limited Partnership
earnings to 6% until it returned a £1.5 million debt (approved by a supporting act, 13
Geo. 3 c. 64).

2. The British government’s initial move in regulating and controlling the corporation’s
proceedings in India.

3. It made it illegal for firm servants to engage in any personal commerce or receive
donations or bribery from “natives.”

4. The Act promoted Warren Hastings, the Administrator of Bengal, to Gov. of Bengal,
and placed Madras & Mumbai within Bengal’s administration. It provided the
groundwork for India’s centralized government. With the help of a four-member
executive council, the Governor of Bengal has become the Lieutenant Governor of
Bengal. Decisions will be made by a simple majority, with the Governor General
voting solely in the event of a tie.

5. Calcutta’s Supreme Court is established, featuring Sir Elijah Impey as the very first
Chief Judge. The court possesses civil as well as judicial power. Original and
appellate jurisdiction are also available.

6. It has given the corporation permission to preserve its Indian territorial control. It is
referred to be a regulatory act since it does not give the firm entire control. In the
end, we may say that this constituted the initial step towards legislative control of
the corporation.

Faults in Regulating Act, 1773

Here are some of the shortcomings of the regulation act 1773,

• Absence of a veto authority for the Governor-General

• It didn’t address complaints of Indian customers who’d been giving the corporation
money

• It had no effect on the corporation’s officials’ corruption

• The Supreme Court’s authority was unclear

• The legislative oversight of the company’s operations was ineffectual since there
was a total absence of a system in place to examine the reports supplied by the
Governor-General in Cabinet

Conclusion
In India’s constitution, the Regulation Act of 1773 is very significant. For first time in India, a
new constitution for business governance was adopted by this statute. This Act marked the
commencement of British legislative oversight of the Company’s regime in India. As a
consequence, the management of the Firm’s ruled territories wasn’t any longer a private
thing for the Firm’s traders.

The main purpose of the Regulation Act was to stay abreast of the Firm’s businesses in
India and Britain and to fix any deficiencies that had previously existed.

Q3 Settlement of 1781,1833and 1853

Here’s a concise breakdown of the settlements of 1781, 1833, and 1853, explained in four
pages with key details about each.

Page 1: The Settlement of 1781

Background and Causes:

The Settlement of 1781 refers to a phase within the American Revolutionary War,
particularly involving the culmination of British colonial interests and the strategic military
efforts of American, French, and British forces. The year 1781 was pivotal in the broader
conflict between Great Britain and the American colonies striving for independence.

• Key Historical Context:

The American Revolution was fueled by a growing sense of frustration among the
American colonies over British taxation policies without representation. By 1781,
the colonies had formed the Continental Army, under the command of General
George Washington, and had received significant support from France, which was
eager to undermine British influence.

• Battle of Yorktown:
The settlement of 1781 is closely associated with the Siege of Yorktown, the final
major military action of the American Revolutionary War. In October 1781, General
Washington, with French military aid, successfully besieged British General
Cornwallis’s army at Yorktown, Virginia. This battle led to the surrender of Cornwallis
and effectively ended large-scale fighting.

• Treaty of Paris (1783):

The victory at Yorktown set the stage for peace negotiations. While the formal treaty,
the Treaty of Paris, was signed in 1783, the military resolution in 1781 effectively
ended British hopes of regaining control over the colonies. The treaty granted the
 United States independence and established its borders, leading to the formal
establishment of the new nation.

Consequences:

• The collapse of British colonial control over the American colonies.

• The rise of the United States as an independent republic.

• Significant European realignment, with France gaining prestige for its role in
defeating Britain.

Page 2: The Abolition of Slavery Settlement of 1833

Background and Causes:

The 1833 settlement refers to the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act in the British
Empire, which ended slavery in most British colonies. This event was part of a larger
abolitionist movement that had gained momentum during the late 18th and early 19th
centuries.

• Rise of the Abolitionist Movement:

Inspired by Enlightenment ideals and growing moral opposition to the brutal
treatment of enslaved people, movements such as the British Anti-Slavery Society
led by figures like William Wilberforce campaigned vigorously for the abolition of the
slave trade and slavery.

• Earlier Progress: The Slave Trade Act of 1807 had already banned the transatlantic
slave trade, but slavery itself persisted within British colonies, particularly in the
Caribbean and India.

Key Features of the Act:

• Abolition of Slavery:
The 1833 act provided for the immediate abolition of slavery across the British
Empire, except for in territories controlled by the East India Company, Ceylon (Sri
Lanka), and Saint Helena. However, slavery in these areas was abolished in 1843.

• Apprenticeship System:
To mitigate the economic impact on planters, former slaves were initially bound to
their former owners as apprentices for up to six years. This system was intended to
prepare enslaved people for full freedom, but it faced significant resistance and was
ultimately abolished by 1838.
 • Compensation to Slave Owners:
To avoid backlash from powerful landowners, the British government allocated £20
million (a huge sum at the time) as compensation to slave owners for the loss of
their "property." However, no compensation was given to the freed individuals.

Consequences:

• The act was a major victory for the abolitionist movement, but former slaves faced
continued economic and social hardship.

• The abolition of slavery in the British Empire influenced similar movements in other
parts of the world, including the United States.

Page 3: The Indian Reforms Settlement of 1853

Background and Causes:

The 1853 settlement refers to the Indian Charter Act of 1853, which marked a significant
shift in British governance of India during the era of the British East India Company. The
Charter Act was passed during a period of growing unrest in India, combined with
increasing scrutiny of the East India Company’s administration.

• Previous Charter Acts (1813, 1833):

Earlier Charter Acts had already curtailed some of the powers of the East India
Company and opened up trade with India to other British merchants. The 1833 act,
in particular, had centralized British authority in India and ended the company's
commercial activities, turning it solely into a governing body.

• Growing Unrest in India:

By 1853, India was becoming increasingly difficult to govern due to a combination of
local resistance, economic exploitation, and British disregard for Indian customs
and traditions. The widespread corruption within the East India Company and its
harsh policies led to increasing criticism in Britain.

Key Provisions of the 1853 Charter Act:

• Renewal of East India Company’s Role:

Unlike previous acts, the Charter Act of 1853 did not set a specific time limit on the
East India Company’s rule in India. Instead, it allowed the British government to
retain direct control over the company’s administration.
 • Administrative Reforms:
The act introduced reforms to the legislative and administrative apparatus governing
India. It marked the beginning of a more meritocratic civil service, with entrance
exams being introduced for the Indian Civil Service, allowing Indians to participate
in the administration.

• Legislative Council:
The act expanded the Governor-General's Council, establishing it as a proper
legislative body, which included members from outside the company’s directors.
This was an effort to introduce more accountability.

Consequences:

• The act laid the groundwork for the eventual transfer of power from the East India
Company to the British Crown, which happened in 1858 following the Indian
Rebellion of 1857.

• It marked a significant shift toward modern governance in colonial India, with some
reforms aimed at improving efficiency and reducing corruption.

Page 4: Comparative Analysis and Long-term Impact

Comparing the Settlements:

1. 1781 – American Revolution Settlement:

o This settlement marked the end of colonial rule and the birth of a new
independent nation.

o It set the tone for later independence movements across the world,
especially in colonies dominated by European powers.

2. 1833 – Abolition of Slavery in the British Empire:

o The abolition of slavery was a moral victory and reshaped social and
economic dynamics across the British Empire.

o It was also a landmark moment in global human rights movements, leading

to the eventual abolition of slavery worldwide.

3. 1853 – Indian Charter Act Reforms:

 o These reforms were part of Britain’s ongoing attempt to maintain control over
India through the East India Company, but with increasing governmental
oversight.

o The Act set the stage for direct British governance after the Indian Rebellion
of 1857 and reflected the growing tensions within colonial rule.

Long-Term Consequences:

• End of Colonialism:
The 1781 settlement in the American colonies was one of the first successful anti-
colonial movements, influencing the spread of independence movements across
the globe, from Latin America to Africa and Asia in the 20th century.

• Human Rights Movements:

The abolition of slavery in 1833 reflected growing global awareness of human rights,
and it encouraged similar abolition movements, notably the U.S. Emancipation
Proclamation in 1863 and the eventual abolition of slavery in Brazil in 1888.

• Reformation of Colonial Rule:

The 1853 Indian Charter Act was an attempt to reform British colonial governance
but ultimately highlighted the flaws of imperial rule. It indirectly led to more
demands for self-rule in India, culminating in the Indian independence movement of
the 20th century.

These three settlements were pivotal moments in global history, reshaping the social,
political, and economic landscapes of the world. They demonstrated the complexities of
imperialism, the slow march towards human rights, and the gradual shift towards self-
governance and decolonization.

Q4 Indian Councils Act 1861

Indian Councils Act 1861 was the United Kingdom's Parliament Act which metamorphosed
the Executive Council of India so that it would work as a cabinet on the portfolio system.

What is Indian Council Act 1861?

Indian Councils Act 1861 was an Act of the Parliament of the Britishers which made
efficient and important changes in the Council of Governor General. It was passed on 1
August,1861 by the Parliament of Britishers. It converted the Executive Council of Viceroy
into a small Cabinet on the system of portfolio and all the 5 ordinary members would
become in charge of different departments including home, military, law, finance and
revenue of the government of Calcutta. The chief Military Commander sat as an
extravagant member with the India Council Act 1861. This special member was entrusted
to the Executive Council of Viceroy to control the Public Works Department which later
came to be known as Commerce and Industry after 1904. The Governor General took
charge of the Foreign Department which was concerned with princely states relations and
powers of foreign borders.

Viceroy Lytton in 1879 felt grateful to abolish the overall council to accommodate the
requirements for the elimination of the import duties of the government on manufacturers
of the British’s cotton despite desperate requirements of India for revenue in the year of
disorders of agriculture and widespread starvation. This act was introduced with the aim to
involve the people of India with the law making process. The Indian Council Act, 1861
restored the powers of legislation of Madras and Bombay Presidencies which were taken
away by the Charter Act, 1833.

Provisions of Indian Council Act 1861

The provisions of Indian Council Act, 1861 are as follows;

• Lord Canning, the Viceroy and the Governor General instituted the Portfolio system
in which each member was appointed a portfolio of a specific department.

• For the functions of the Executive Council and purpose of Legislative, there would
not be less than 6 members and not more than 12 members and these members
came to be known as the Executive Council’s Additional Member and out of which
half of these members would be non-official i.e. Indian or Britisher.

• Governor General had given power to nominate these additional members for 2
years.

• To the Executive Council, Lord Canning nominated 3 members and they are Sir
Dinkar Rao, the Maharaja of Patiala and the Raja of Benares.

• All the bills which are related to military, religion, foreign affairs or public debt could
be passed only by the assent of the Governor General.

• The Governor General had the right or power to propagate the ordinances during
emergencies without the concurrence of the Council. Therefore, 6 months was the
life of ordinance.

• Calcutta’s Legislative Council had power for British India to proceed with the law.
Drawbacks of India Council Act, 1861

The demerits or drawbacks of India Council Act, 1861 are;

• The function and role of the legislative council is limited.

• The discussion on matters like finance and revenue were restricted.

• The Madras and Bombay legislative powers decentralised the powers of legislature.

• The Governor General due to his special and extraordinary powers became an
arbitrary leader.

• Many bills in the Council were passed even without discussion and the Indian
members were not allowed to oppose the bill.

• The non-official members had no right to explain the problems that the common
people faced or ask the questions.

Merits of Indian Council Act, 1861

The merits of Indian Council Act, 1861 are as follows;

• It helps in restoring the powers of legislation of the Madras and Bombay

Presidencies.

• It also gave power to the Presidency of Calcutta so that they could make laws for
entire British India.

• It provides good provisions for the Council’s Constitution of India’s Governor

General.

Conclusion

Indian Council Act 1861 was an act which made efficient modulations for the Governor
General’s Council. This act aims to alter the Council’s composition for advanced purposes
of the executives and legislations. Its most notable and excellent aspect was the Indian
members’ involvement in law making processes. It serves as the basis for the Bengal’s,
Punjab and North- western Frontier Provinces legislative council’s establishment.

Indian Councils Act 1892

The Indian Council Act of 1892 was introduced by the British parliament to amend the
existing constitutional provisions in the country. The act increased the strenght of
legislative councils in the country.
The English East India Company came to the country in the 1600s and established their
ruling regime in the country after taking advantage of the existing regional and cultural
disparities. Over time, the Indians realised their resources were being looted and they were
being undermined in their own country. Soon after this realisation, the Indians started
revolting against British rule and the British felt compelled to incorporate new changes in
order to press down the rebellions.

A charter act was introduced in 1833 which introduced a 4th member (law member) who
was authorized to sit and vote in the council of the Governor-General for legislative
purposes. Another major change incorporated by the charter was the change in the power
structure of the Presidency council as they were deprived of their independent authority.
Another Charter was introduced by the British in 1853 under which the law member was
given the authoritative position of Member of the Council of the Governor-General and the
number of the council members was increased to be 6. Apart from being a law-making
body, the council was entrusted with the responsibility of handling the grievances as well.

The revolt of 1857, although a failure opened the eyes of the British government. They
believed that the revolt took place because of a lack of communication between the
colonial government and the Indian authorities. As a measure to curb further uprisings, the
British Government came up with the Indian Council Act of 1861 which sought to improve
the medium of communications between the colonial government and the Indian
authorities. One of the major changes introduced through this act was that the number of
additional members in the Governor-General’s council was to be mandatorily not less than
six and not more than 12 in numbers. These additional members were to be nominated by
the Governor-General itself for a period of two years. One-half of the additional members
were supposed to be not from the military or crown service background. Usually, three
Indians were nominated in the council. Furthermore, the governments of Bombay and
Madras were restored to power. However, the misuse of the loopholes present in the Indian
Council Act of 1861 was identified to a very large extent. The officials nominated the
Indians who helped them during the 1857 revolt and often the princes, divans or big
landowners were allowed to enter the council. Even after the presented criticisms, the
move was celebrated as the step that made the Indians feel that their opinions were
valued.

Indian Councils Act 1892

The introduced Indian Councils Act of 1861 was getting the job done from the eyes of the
colonial government. However, the subsequent years following the revolt of 1857 saw a rise
of nationalism in the country. The common people living in the country identified the
mutual interests and aspirations for the country. The British saw this as a threat to their
rule. Meanwhile, the newly formed Indian National Congress demanded the expansion of
executive and legislative councils across the country and the inclusion of an increased
number of Indians in the council. At the time of the INC constitution, Lord Dufferin was the
Governor-General of the country. The INC chased after the government for the inclusion of
more Indians into the council. However, the government did not see the educated Indians
as the true representatives of the people of India and saw their demands with suspicion.
Over time, the colonial Government realised that the rise of nationalism in the country
cannot be subsided any further and to safeguard the colonial interest in the country, they’ll
have to fulfil the demands of the Indians who were willing to fit into a small and suitable
constitutional framework.

The government sought that by introducing few constitutional changes in the country, the
educated Indians can be subsided and with this objective, the colonial government
introduced the Indian Council Act of 1892.

Main Features of Indian Council Act 1892

The main features of the introduced Indian Council Act of 1892 are as follows:

• Several features of the new act resembled the previous act of 1861. However, two
major changes were introduced in the Indian Council Act of 1892.

• The newly introduced act made it mandatory for the General-Governors council to
have not less than 10 and not more than 16 members, which required that one-half
of the council should not have the background of military personnel, the candidates
chosen should essentially be non-official.

• The demands included a law for the elections. However, the Indian Council Act of
1892 authorised the ruling Governor-General to invite the bodies in India to
nominate or elect the council representatives.

• The implementation of the proposed law could have been in the creation of the
legislative council in Punjab and Burma. One member was selected on the
recommendation made by the Calcutta Chamber of Commerce. Usually, the
recommended names were always elected to be part of the Governor-General’s
council.

• The act emphasised that the members selected to be part of the council were not
there as a representative of any Indian body but as a nominee of the Governor-
General.

• The elected members were allowed to pass resolutions on the annual financial
statements. However, the documents presented were unalterable. In some cases,
 the members of the provinces were allowed to look at the expenditure and revenue
heads of the sectors that were directly under the provincial governments.

• The elected members were allowed to hold discussions on official and internal
matters.

Criticisms of the Indian Council Act 1892

The Indian National Congress heavily criticised the Act of 1892 in its sessions held in the
years 1892 and 1893. It was distressed over the fact that direct elections were not being
introduced in the country. However, the act highlighted that the mentioned rules are liberal
which allowed the nationalist leaders to incorporate their debating and legislative skills and
entered the legislatures themselves to represent the voice of several Indians.

Conclusion

The colonial government introduced the Indian Councils Act of 1892 to subside the efforts
of the Indians to rebel against the crown rule. The law empowered the Indian authorities to
send their representatives to the councils and make the communication system more
transparent.
 UNIT-3
Q1 JUDICIAL REFORMS OF WARREN HASTINGS
Warren Hastings, the first Governor-General of Bengal (1773–1785), introduced several
significant judicial reforms during his tenure in British India. His reforms aimed to bring
efficiency, uniformity, and fairness to the legal system while consolidating British power.
Some key judicial reforms of Warren Hastings are as follows:

1. Reorganization of Courts (1772)

Hastings introduced a dual system of courts, establishing two sets of legal systems: one for
the British and one for the Indian population, recognizing the necessity to account for the
local customs and religious laws.

• Diwani Adalat (Civil Courts):

o These were established in each district to deal with civil matters like property
disputes, contracts, and debts.

o The cases were decided by local laws—Hindu laws for Hindus and Muslim
laws for Muslims—under the supervision of British officials.

• Faujdari Adalat (Criminal Courts):

o These courts handled criminal cases, with local Indian judges (Qadis)
applying Islamic law.

o The British maintained supervisory authority over these courts through their
own administrators.

• Sadar Diwani Adalat:

o This was the highest appellate court for civil cases, located in Calcutta.

o It was presided over by the Governor-General and his council, who had the
final authority.

• Sadar Nizamat Adalat:

o The highest criminal court, also located in Calcutta, which oversaw serious
criminal cases.

o It was run by Indian judges but under the guidance of a British officer,
ensuring British influence in criminal justice.
2. Reformation of the Revenue and Judicial Functions (1774)

• Hastings separated the revenue administration from judicial administration. This

meant that revenue collectors, who were often involved in judicial matters, were
relieved of these responsibilities.

• He established independent judicial officers (Judges and Magistrates) to handle

legal cases, ensuring more impartiality in decision-making.

3. Codification of Laws

• Hastings took steps to codify laws to ensure uniformity in their application.

• The Hindu Law Code and Muslim Law Code were compiled with the assistance of
local scholars and jurists to provide a reference for the courts.

• He introduced regulations to reduce arbitrary interpretations of laws, aiming for a

more standardized approach to legal rulings.

4. Appellate System

• Hastings created a system of appeal, allowing cases decided at the district level to
be appealed to higher courts in Calcutta.

• The establishment of the Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat as
appellate courts reinforced British control over local judicial processes.

5. Reforms in Judicial Process

• Hastings emphasized transparency and fairness in the judicial process.

• He made efforts to ensure that trials were conducted in a more structured and
organized manner, with proper records and documentation of court proceedings.

6. Introduction of English as the Official Language (1773)

• Over time, Hastings introduced English as the official language in higher courts like
the Sadar Diwani Adalat.

• This change made it easier for British officials to manage legal affairs but alienated
many locals from the legal process as they were not familiar with English.

7. Regulating Act of 1773

• The Regulating Act of 1773, passed by the British Parliament, was another major
reform associated with Warren Hastings.
 • It established a Supreme Court in Calcutta (1774) to serve as a higher court of
appeal and control British subjects.

• The Supreme Court’s establishment was a significant step in placing the legal
system under British control, though it led to conflicts with local courts and officials
due to jurisdictional overlaps.

8. Encouragement of Judicial Independence

• While British authorities were involved in the judicial system, Hastings encouraged
the independence of the judiciary from the executive arm of government.

• This was an early attempt to ensure impartiality and reduce corruption within the
judiciary.

Significance of Hastings’ Judicial Reforms:

Warren Hastings' reforms were instrumental in laying the foundation for the modern
judicial system in India. His reforms introduced structural changes, improved the
administration of justice, and sought to balance British control with respect for local
customs and laws. However, these changes also reinforced British dominance in the legal
system and created a legacy of dual legal frameworks that persisted throughout colonial
rule.

Q2 JUDICIAL REFORMS OF LORD CORNWALLIS

The judicial reforms of Lord Cornwallis were a significant aspect of British colonial
governance in India, introduced during the tenure of Lord Cornwallis as the Governor-
General of Bengal (1786–1793). His reforms were aimed at creating a more organized,
efficient, and uniform legal system that replaced the traditional judicial practices, which
the British considered inadequate for effective governance. The reforms laid the foundation
for the modern judicial system in India.

Here are the key features of Cornwallis' judicial reforms:

1. Separation of Powers

Cornwallis introduced the principle of the separation of executive and judicial functions.
Previously, the district collectors were both revenue collectors and judges. Cornwallis
created a clear distinction between these two roles:

• Collectors were made purely revenue officers.

• Judicial powers were vested in the newly established courts.

2. Hierarchy of Courts

Cornwallis created a structured judicial system with a hierarchy of courts, which included:

• Diwani Adalat: Civil courts at the district level.

• Faujdari Adalat: Criminal courts at the district level, with native judges presiding
over them but under British supervision.

• Sadr Diwani Adalat: The highest civil court of appeal, located in Calcutta, with
European judges.

• Sadr Nizamat Adalat: The highest criminal court of appeal, with cases reviewed by
European judges.

3. Reforms in Civil Justice (Diwani Adalat)

• District-level civil courts (Diwani Adalats) were established to deal with civil cases
like disputes over property, contracts, etc.

• The courts were presided over by British judges or magistrates.

• Appeals from the district courts could be made to the Sadr Diwani Adalat in
Calcutta.

4. Reforms in Criminal Justice (Faujdari Adalat)

• Cornwallis reformed criminal justice by setting up criminal courts under British

supervision.

• District-level Faujdari Adalats were presided over by Indian judges but supervised by
European officers.

• Appeals from these courts could be made to the Sadr Nizamat Adalat.

5. Introduction of European Judges

• At the higher levels, especially in the Sadr Diwani and Nizamat Adalats, Cornwallis
introduced European judges to ensure the consistency and impartiality of the
decisions.

• The British wanted to avoid potential biases or irregularities that might arise in the
local judicial system.

6. Legal Code
 • Cornwallis introduced a legal code that was largely based on English law but was
adapted for the Indian context.

• It aimed to create a more transparent and consistent legal system.

7. Fixed Salaries for Judges

• In order to curb corruption, Cornwallis fixed salaries for judges and officials. This
was an important measure because it reduced the need for these officials to engage
in corrupt practices like taking bribes.

8. Equality Before the Law

• Cornwallis implemented the idea of equality before the law, although it was mostly
applied to British subjects. Indians were still often subjected to discriminatory
practices, but the reforms were a step toward a more standardized legal system.

9. Abolition of Private Revenue Collection

• Prior to Cornwallis, revenue collectors had judicial powers, which led to arbitrary
and unjust practices. By removing their judicial powers, Cornwallis ensured that
revenue administration and justice delivery were handled separately.

Importance of the Cornwallis Judicial Reforms

• Cornwallis' reforms laid the foundation for a modern judiciary in India.

• These reforms contributed to the eventual establishment of the rule of law,

although they were still biased toward British interests.

• They created a structured system that persisted into the 19th and 20th centuries,
influencing the development of the Indian legal system post-independence.

In conclusion, the judicial reforms of Lord Cornwallis were aimed at bringing efficiency,
uniformity, and British legal principles to the judicial system in colonial India. While these
reforms were not entirely free from bias, they marked a significant shift from traditional
judicial practices.

Q3 JUDICIAL REFORMS OF LORD WILLIAM BENTINCK

JUDICIAL REFORMS OF LORD WILLIAM BENTINCK Lord William Bentinck became the
governor-general of India in July,1828 and held that office uptil March,1835. During this
period he made several reforms in the judicial administration which in many respects were
original and many of the institutions created by him forms the basis of our present judicial
system. They figure as an outstanding mark in our legal history next to those made by Lord
Cornwallis. Creation of Sadar Adalat at Allahabad  So far there was only one Sadar Adalat
at Calcutta. People had to travel long distances to seek justice from that court. Therefore,
in many cases people instead of going to the Adalat preferred to suffer injustice. It was
necessary that a Sadar Adalat should be created in those far situated places which had
now come under the jurisdiction of the Company. By Regulation VI of 1831,Lord Bentinck
met that demand and established a Sadar adalat at Allahabad from 1st january, 1832. The
constitution and powers of the Adalat were the same as that of Calcutta. The territorial
jurisdiction of the new Adalat extended to Banaras , Meerut, Muzzfar Nagar and
Bulandshahr. Reforms in Criminal Judiciary  Abolition of Circuit court – The circuit court
was suffering from many defects like Firstly, that court had heavy work load and therefore ,
the arrears went on piling and the justice was delayed. Secondly, in many cases the
references had to be made to the Sadar Nizamat Adalat which did not entertain the matter
for years and the accused had to wait for long in the jail for their turn. Thirdly, the no. of
circuit courts was very limited with large territorial jurisdiction. Fourthly, the territory being
large and the turn of the court being hardly twice a year, these courts didn’t understand the
nature of the people and therefore, many times innocent people were punished. It was
necessary to devise a new system replacing the old one. Accordingly in 1829 Lord Bentinck
replaced these courts with the Court of Commissioner.  Creation of Court of
Commissioner – Regulation 1 of 1829 which replaced the Circuit court by the court of
Commissioner also provided for the appointment of Commissioner. The Commissioner
was called as the Commissioner of Revenue and Circuit and had the power of
superintendence and control over the Magistrates, police, Collectors and other revenue
officers. The entire area was divided into divisions and for each division a Commissioner
was appointed. The commissioner was subject to the control of the Sadar Nizamat Adalat
in his judicial functions and to the Board of Revenue in his revenue functions. The
commissioners were also authorized to hear appeals against the decisions of the
Magistrates and the Joint Magistrates. The decision of the commissioner in the appeal
couldn’t be argued.  Creation of the Court of District and Sessions judge- Regulation VII of
1831 authorized the government to invest the judges of the District Diwani Adalat with the
duties of the Sessions. The judges had to meet in sessions and hence called Sessions
Judges. During the time in which they did not conduct the criminal work they were called as
District Judges. The Sessions Judges tried those cases which committed to them by the
Magistrates.  Creation of Collector-Magistrates- The collectors were authorized to
exercise Magisterial function and thus the institution of CollectorsMagistrates was created
.  Increased participation of indians- The participation of Indians was increased in the
criminal administration of justice by Lord Bentinck through a Regulation of 1831, which
authorized the Magistrates to refer any criminal case to a Sadar Ameen or a Principal
Sardar Ameen for investigation. But they could not be authorized to make any
commitment. The powers of these Indian Officers were declared in 1832 and they could
award punishment upto a period of one month along with hard labour and corporal
punishment not exceeding, 30 Rattans. Reforms in Civil Judicature  Enhancement in the
powers of the Munsifs and Sadar Ameens- The number of Munsifsand Sadar Ameens
employed in the civil judicature was increased by Bentinck to a great extent by specifying
the local jurisdiction of those officers. By Regulation V of 1813, the jurisdiction of the
Munsifs was raised to Rs.300. Their monthly salary was fixed . While the jurisdiction of the
Sadar Ameen was extended upto Rs.1000 incases referred to him by the District Diwani
Adalat. In 1832, they were also authorized to execute their decrees and orders.  Court of
Principal Sadar Ameen- A court of Principal Sadar Ameen with a native officer was created.
Principal Sadar Ameen was to be appointed by the Governor-General-in –Council and was
given powers to decide cases of civil nature between Rs. 1000 to Rs. 5000 If referred to him
by the District Diwani Court he could hear appeals against the decisions of the Munsifs and
Sadar Ameens. Appeals against him were heard by the Diwani Adalat and in special cases
by the Sadar Diwani Adalat.  Judicial powers of the Registrar abolished – The registrar was
deprived of all the judicial powers which he was exercising so far. His powers were
transferred to Sadar Ameen and Principal Sadar Ameen.  Abolition of Provincial Court of
Appeals and enhancement of powers of the Diwani Adalat- By Regulation V of 1831
Provincial court of Appeals was abolished and replaced by Diwani Adalat  Introduction of
Jury System- Regulation VI of 1832 authorized the Governor-General-in-Council to
empower any judge of the Diwani Adalat to take the help of Jury in any civil case. The jury
could be certain prominent members of the locality or the two persons working as
assessors who had to hear evidence with the judge .

Judicial reforms by Lord William Bentinck, the Governor-General of India from 1828 to
1835, were part of broader administrative and social reforms during his tenure. His judicial
reforms sought to modernize the legal system and make it more efficient and accessible,
especially for Indian subjects under British rule. Key aspects of Bentinck's judicial reforms
include:

1. Abolition of Sati (1829)

Although not strictly a judicial reform, one of Bentinck’s most famous actions was the
abolition of Sati (the practice of widow immolation) in 1829. This was both a social and
legal reform, with the banning of Sati being enforced through judicial mechanisms.
2. Introduction of English as the Language of Law

Bentinck introduced English as the language of higher courts, replacing Persian, which had
been the official language of law in India. This was aimed at making the legal process more
accessible for British administrators and reducing the complexities caused by multiple
languages in the judicial system.

3. Reorganization of the Court System

• Reduction of the Powers of Village Zamindars: Bentinck reformed the judicial

powers of Zamindars (landowners). Prior to his reforms, zamindars held significant
judicial power in their local areas. He reduced this power and brought many local
disputes under the jurisdiction of British courts.

• Establishment of More Courts: Bentinck expanded the network of courts in India to

improve access to justice, creating courts of appeal and establishing more
systematic procedures for handling legal cases. This included the creation of
additional district courts and sessions courts.

4. Separation of Judicial and Executive Powers

Bentinck sought to separate judicial and executive functions, which had been mixed under
earlier British administrations. By doing this, he aimed to ensure more impartial and
independent judicial processes. This was part of an effort to reduce corruption and
conflicts of interest among British administrators.

5. Codification and Uniformity in Law

Bentinck’s tenure saw the beginning of efforts to codify Indian laws. Although full
codification of laws in India would happen later, during his time, the legal system began to
be more standardized and regularized, reducing the arbitrary application of laws.

6. Judicial Salaries and Appointments

Bentinck also improved the salaries and conditions of judicial officers. This was aimed at
attracting more qualified personnel to the judiciary and reducing corruption, which had
been a problem in earlier judicial systems.

7. Equalization of Legal Systems for Indians and Europeans

Bentinck worked to make the legal system more equitable by trying to apply the same legal
standards to both Indians and Europeans. Prior to his reforms, Europeans in India were
often treated more leniently than Indians, with separate courts and more favorable
outcomes for Europeans.
These reforms laid the foundation for a more centralized and organized judicial system in
India, which later became further formalized with the Indian Penal Code and other legal
developments in the mid-19th century.

Q4 THE ESTABLISHMENT OF HIGH COURTS IN INDIA

UNDER THE INDIAN HIGH COURTS ACT OF 1861
The establishment of High Courts in India under the Indian High Courts Act of 1861 was a
significant legal reform during British rule. The Act was passed by the British Parliament to
create and regulate High Courts in the major provinces of British India, replacing the earlier
judicial systems of Supreme Courts and Sadar Adalats (Sadr Diwani Adalat and Sadr
Nizamat Adalat).

Here are the key points about the establishment of High Courts under the Act:

1. Background:

• Prior to 1861, India's judicial system comprised various courts, including the
Supreme Courts at Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, established under the Royal
Charter of 1774, and the Sadar Adalats, which functioned as the highest native
courts in civil and criminal matters.

• There were challenges in administering justice, including conflicts of jurisdiction

between the Supreme Courts and the Sadar Adalats. The Indian High Courts Act of
1861 aimed to streamline and unify the judicial system.

2. Creation of High Courts:

• The Act empowered the British Crown to establish High Courts in the Presidency
towns of Calcutta (Kolkata), Bombay (Mumbai), and Madras (Chennai) by Letters
Patent.

• These High Courts were intended to replace both the Supreme Courts and the Sadar
Adalats, bringing them under one unified judicial body.

3. Composition of the High Courts:

• The High Courts consisted of a Chief Justice and a varying number of Puisne
(junior) Judges.
 • Judges could be appointed from various backgrounds: they could be barristers
(lawyers trained in the UK), judges from existing courts, or those with legal expertise.

• The High Courts were given the authority to exercise original (hearing cases first),
appellate (hearing appeals), and extraordinary jurisdiction.

4. Jurisdiction and Powers:

• The High Courts were vested with original civil and criminal jurisdiction (in certain
cases) and appellate jurisdiction over all lower courts in the presidency towns and
surrounding regions.

• They had the authority to hear appeals from lower courts, issue writs, and supervise
lower courts in their territories.

• The Act merged the Supreme Court's English common law jurisdiction and the
Sadar Adalats' jurisdiction in native law, ensuring a fusion of different legal
traditions under one judicial system.

5. Significance:

• The establishment of these High Courts marked a crucial step in modernizing India’s
judicial system and integrating it with the British legal framework.

• The High Courts played a central role in shaping legal principles, administering
justice, and becoming important institutions during both colonial and post-colonial
India.

6. Legacy:

• The High Courts created under the 1861 Act still exist today, functioning as some of
the highest judicial authorities in India under the framework of the Indian
Constitution, established in 1950.

• The Act laid the foundation for a centralized and organized judiciary in India, with
High Courts continuing to serve as the highest courts at the state level.

The Indian High Courts Act of 1861 thus marked the birth of the modern High Court system
in India, and its impact continues to be felt in the Indian judicial system today.

The High Court Act of 1861, also known as the Indian High Courts Act, played a pivotal role
in shaping the modern judicial system in British India. This Act was a part of the British
government's effort to streamline and modernize the administration of justice in India.
Below is a four-page breakdown on the establishment of High Courts under the High Court
Act of 1861:

Page 1: Background and Context of the Indian Judicial System Pre-1861

Before the enactment of the High Court Act of 1861, the judicial system in British India was
fragmented, with overlapping jurisdictions and multiple courts often leading to inefficiency
and confusion. During the early years of British rule, the administration of justice in India
was largely shaped by:

1. Presidency Towns: In the three major presidency towns—Calcutta (now Kolkata),

Bombay (now Mumbai), and Madras (now Chennai)—judicial power was divided
between Supreme Courts and the Sadar Diwani Adalat (civil courts) or Sadar
Nizamat Adalat (criminal courts). These courts operated separately and followed
different legal systems.

o The Supreme Courts were established under the British Crown, and they
administered English law primarily for Europeans and British subjects.

o The Sadar Courts dealt with Indian subjects and administered justice based
on local laws, customs, and regulations.

2. Mofussil (Provincial) Courts: Outside the presidency towns, the judicial system
was more decentralized. The judicial system in the mofussil areas, which referred to
the rural and provincial regions, had lower-level courts such as district courts under
the control of British-appointed judges. These courts often followed traditional
Indian legal systems, which further complicated the legal landscape.

3. Challenges in the Existing Judicial System:

o Overlapping jurisdictions: The Supreme Courts and Sadar Courts had

overlapping jurisdictions in several matters, leading to conflicts in decisions
and delays in justice.

o Lack of uniformity: Different regions followed different systems of law—

English common law in presidency towns, and customary law or local
regulations in mofussil areas—leading to inconsistencies.

o Delays and inefficiency: The multiple levels of appeal and the different
jurisdictions often led to delays and confusion in the administration of
justice.
The British government recognized the need to create a more streamlined and efficient
judicial system. This was the background against which the High Court Act of 1861 was
conceived.

Page 2: The Indian High Courts Act, 1861: Key Provisions

The Indian High Courts Act of 1861 was a significant piece of legislation passed by the
British Parliament. The Act laid the foundation for the establishment of High Courts in the
three presidency towns, thereby unifying and consolidating the fragmented judicial system
in British India.

Objectives of the Act:

1. Consolidation of Jurisdiction: One of the primary objectives was to merge the

jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts and the Sadar Diwani and Sadar Nizamat Adalat
into a single judicial authority.

2. Creation of High Courts: The Act provided for the establishment of High Courts in
Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, which were to serve as the highest courts of appeal
for both civil and criminal matters within their respective jurisdictions.

3. Judicial and Administrative Reforms: It aimed to provide more efficient and

uniform judicial processes across the presidency towns and the mofussil regions.

Key Provisions of the Act:

1. Abolition of Existing Courts: The Act abolished the Supreme Courts and the Sadar
Courts in the presidency towns and replaced them with High Courts.

2. Establishment of High Courts: The Act authorized the Crown to issue Letters
Patent for the establishment of High Courts in the three presidency towns of
Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras. These High Courts were granted the authority to
hear both civil and criminal cases, as well as appeals from lower courts.

3. Composition of High Courts: Each High Court was to consist of a Chief Justice and
a number of puisne judges (ordinary judges), who would be appointed by the Crown.
At least one-third of the judges were required to be barristers of five years' standing,
while the others could be civil servants with significant experience in Indian law.

4. Jurisdiction of High Courts:

o The High Courts were granted original jurisdiction in civil and criminal
matters within the presidency towns.
 o They were given appellate jurisdiction over cases from lower courts in both
civil and criminal matters.

o The High Courts were also granted the power to issue writs and oversee the
administration of justice within their jurisdiction.

5. Law and Procedure: The High Courts were to apply a mix of English law and local
customs, depending on the nature of the case and the parties involved. The Act
empowered the High Courts to make rules and regulations to ensure the smooth
administration of justice.

Page 3: Establishment of the High Courts in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras

1. High Court of Calcutta:

The first High Court established under the Act was the High Court of Calcutta (originally
the High Court of Judicature at Fort William), which was inaugurated on July 1, 1862. It
replaced the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William and the Sadar Courts. The court’s
jurisdiction covered Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, and Assam.

The Letters Patent of 1862 issued by the Crown defined its powers, including original civil
and criminal jurisdiction over the presidency town of Calcutta and appellate jurisdiction
over lower courts.

2. High Court of Bombay:

Following Calcutta, the High Court of Bombay (now the Bombay High Court) was
established on August 14, 1862, replacing the Supreme Court of Bombay and the Sadar
Courts of the Bombay Presidency. The jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court extended over
a large part of western India, including the provinces of Gujarat and Sindh.

Like Calcutta, the Bombay High Court was granted original jurisdiction over civil and
criminal matters in the city of Bombay and appellate jurisdiction over mofussil areas.

3. High Court of Madras:

The High Court of Madras (now the Madras High Court) was established on August 15,
1862, replacing the Supreme Court of Madras and the Sadar Courts in the Madras
Presidency. The High Court of Madras had original jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases
within the city of Madras and appellate jurisdiction in the surrounding regions.
The High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras formed the highest judicial authorities in
India at that time. These courts had the authority to hear appeals from the lower courts and
had the power to issue writs for the enforcement of legal rights.

Page 4: Significance and Legacy of the Indian High Courts Act, 1861

The Indian High Courts Act of 1861 marked a major milestone in the development of the
Indian judicial system. Its significance and legacy can be seen in several ways:

1. Consolidation of the Judicial System: By merging the Supreme Courts and Sadar
Courts into a single High Court in each presidency town, the Act brought much-
needed uniformity and consolidation to the judicial system in British India.

2. Introduction of Modern Legal Practices: The Act facilitated the introduction of

modern legal principles, procedures, and practices based on English common law.
The High Courts played a pivotal role in shaping the development of Indian law,
particularly in the areas of civil rights, property law, and criminal justice.

3. Foundation for Future Legal Developments: The establishment of the High Courts
laid the foundation for the development of a more robust judicial system in India.
Over time, the High Courts expanded their jurisdictions and played an instrumental
role in ensuring the rule of law during both the colonial and post-independence
periods.

4. Judicial Independence: The appointment of qualified judges and the granting of

powers such as writ jurisdiction helped ensure a certain degree of judicial
independence, even under colonial rule.

5. Legacy Post-Independence: After India's independence in 1947, the High Courts

established under the 1861 Act continued to function and became an integral part
of the Indian judiciary. Today, these High Courts remain among the highest judicial
authorities in India, with a critical role in ensuring justice and upholding the
Constitution.

In conclusion, the High Court Act of 1861 was a key legislative measure that transformed
the Indian judicial system by establishing High Courts in major presidency towns, ensuring
uniformity, and laying the foundation for modern judicial administration in India. The legacy
of this Act continues in the functioning of High Courts in contemporary India, which play a
vital role in the nation's legal and constitutional framework.
Q5 THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT OF 1909
The Government of India Act of 1909, also known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, was a
significant legislative act passed by the British Parliament that aimed to introduce some
constitutional reforms in India. This act is notable for marking a step toward representative
government in British India. Here’s a detailed overview of the act, covering its background,
key provisions, impact, and significance.

Background

Historical Context: The early 20th century was a period of rising nationalism in India. The
Indian National Congress was increasingly vocal in its demands for more significant
political representation and self-governance. The British government recognized the need
for reform to quell rising discontent among the Indian populace.

Key Figures: The act was named after two key figures:

• John Morley: The Secretary of State for India, who advocated for reforms and
increased Indian participation in governance.

• Lord Minto: The Viceroy of India, who was responsible for implementing these
reforms.

Objectives of the Act

The primary objectives of the Government of India Act, 1909, were:

1. To increase Indian participation in governance.

2. To introduce a system of separate electorates for Muslims, thereby acknowledging

their political interests.

3. To quell nationalist sentiments and promote stability in British India.

Key Provisions of the Act

1. Expansion of Legislative Councils:

o The act increased the size of the Imperial Legislative Council and provincial
councils.

o It provided for the inclusion of elected Indian representatives, marking a shift

toward representative governance.
 o The Imperial Legislative Council was to consist of 60 members, of which 27
were to be elected from various constituencies.

2. Separate Electorates:

o The act introduced separate electorates for Muslims, allowing them to elect
their representatives independently.

o This provision aimed to address the concerns of the Muslim community,

which feared being politically marginalized.

3. Elected Members:

o Certain seats in the legislative councils were reserved for elected Indian
members.

o The act outlined that local bodies could elect members to the provincial
councils.

4. Provincial Legislative Councils:

o The act allowed for the establishment of provincial legislative councils in

various provinces, which would have limited legislative powers.

o Members would be nominated and elected, thus providing a platform for

Indian voices in local governance.

5. Limited Legislative Powers:

o While the act allowed for greater representation, the legislative powers of the
councils remained limited.

o The Governor retained significant powers, including the ability to veto

legislation.

6. Franchise:

o The act maintained a limited franchise based on property qualifications,

which meant that only a small section of the population could vote.

o This limitation on voting rights meant that the act did not represent a
significant shift toward democracy.

Impact of the Act

1. Political Representation:
 o The act marked a critical step toward Indian political representation, though
it fell short of full self-governance.

o It provided a platform for Indian leaders to express their views and

grievances.

2. Muslim Politics:

o The introduction of separate electorates for Muslims solidified the

communal divide in Indian politics.

o It led to increased political mobilization among Muslims, paving the way for
the later demand for Pakistan.

3. Rise of Political Organizations:

o The reforms led to the emergence of new political organizations and

increased activity among existing ones.

o Groups like the All-India Muslim League gained prominence and began to
articulate their political aspirations more clearly.

4. Nationalist Response:

o The Indian National Congress and other nationalist groups criticized the act
for not going far enough in providing self-governance.

o The limited reforms led to a growing disillusionment with British rule among
nationalist leaders.

Significance of the Act

1. Constitutional Development:

o The Government of India Act, 1909, was a significant milestone in the

constitutional development of India.

o It laid the groundwork for future reforms, leading to subsequent acts in 1919
and 1935 that further expanded political participation.

2. Communal Politics:

o The act set a precedent for communal representation in Indian politics,

which has had lasting implications for the political landscape of India.

3. Path to Independence:
 o While the act did not fulfill the aspirations of the Indian populace for
complete self-rule, it highlighted the British government's acknowledgment
of Indian political consciousness and the need for reforms.

o The dissatisfaction with the reforms contributed to the eventual push for
independence.

Conclusion

The Government of India Act of 1909 represented a significant, albeit limited, step toward
political reform in India. While it expanded representation and acknowledged the political
aspirations of various communities, it also reinforced communal divisions and maintained
British control. The act laid the groundwork for future constitutional developments,
influencing the trajectory of Indian politics in the years leading up to independence.
Ultimately, it served as a reminder of the complexities of governance in a diverse society
and the challenges faced in balancing representation with unity.
 UNIT-4
Q1 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT 1919
The Government of India Act 1919 was an act of the British Parliament that sought to
increase the participation of Indians in the administration of their country. The act was
based on the recommendations of a report by Edwin Montagu, the then Secretary of State
for India, and Lord Chelmsford, India’s Viceroy between 1916 and 1921. Hence the
constitutional reforms set forth by this act are known as Montagu-Chelmsford reforms or
Montford reforms.

Principle Features of Government of India Act 1919

Provincial Government

• Executive:

• Dyarchy was introduced, i.e., there were two classes of administrators –

Executive councillors and ministers.

• The Governor was the executive head of the province.

• The subjects were divided into two lists – reserved and transferred.

• The governor was in charge of the reserved list along with his executive
councillors. The subjects under this list were law and order, irrigation,
finance, land revenue, etc.

• The ministers were in charge of subjects under the transferred list. The
subjects included were education, local government, health, excise,
industry, public works, religious endowments, etc.

• The ministers were responsible to the people who elected them through the
legislature.

• These ministers were nominated from among the elected members of the
legislative council.

• The executive councillors were not responsible to the legislature, unlike the
ministers.

• The Secretary of State and the Governor-General could interfere in matters

under the reserved list but this interference was restricted to the transferred
list.
 • Legislature:

• The size of the provincial legislative assemblies was increased. Now about
70% of the members were elected.

• There were communal and class electorates.

• Some women could also vote.

• The governor’s assent was required to pass any bill. He also had veto power
and could issue ordinances also.

To learn more about the legislation passed in British India, click on the linked article.

Central government

• Executive:

• The chief executive authority was the Governor-General.

• There were two lists for administration – central and provincial.

• The provincial list was under the provinces while the centre took care of the
central list.

• Out of the 6 members of the Viceroy’s executive council, 3 were to be Indian

members.

• The governor-general could issue ordinances.

• He could also certify bills that were rejected by the central legislature.

• Legislature:

• A bicameral legislature was set up with two houses – the Legislative

Assembly (forerunner of the Lok Sabha) and the Council of State (forerunner
of the Rajya Sabha).

• Legislative Assembly (Lower House)

 • Members of the Legislative Assembly:

• The nominated members were nominated by the governor-general from

Anglo-Indians and Indian Christians.

• The members had a tenure of 3 years.

• Council of State (Upper House)

• Only male members with a tenure of 5 years.

• Members of the Council of State:

• 27 nominated

• 33 elected

• The legislators could ask questions and also vote on a part of the budget.
 • Only 25% of the budget was subject to vote.

• Rest was non-votable.

• A bill had to be passed in both houses before it became law.

• There were three measures to resolve any deadlock between both houses – joint
committees, joint conferences and joint sittings.

• Governor-General

• The governor-general’s assent was required for any bill to become law even if
both houses had passed it.

• He could also enact a bill without the legislature’s consent.

• He could prevent a bill from becoming law if he deems it detrimental to the

peace of the country.

• He could disallow any question, adjournment motion or debate in the house.

To know more about the Governor Generals of Bengal and India, visit the linked article.

Who could vote?

• The franchise was restricted and there was no universal adult suffrage.

• Voters should have paid land revenue of Rs.3000 or have a property with rental value
or have taxable income.

• They should possess previous experience in the legislative council.

• They should be members of a university senate.

• They should hold certain offices in the local bodies.

• They should hold some specific titles.

• All this narrowed the number of people who could vote to an abysmal number.

Indian Council

• There were to be at least 8 and a maximum of 12 members in the council.

• Half of the members should have ten years of experience in public service in India.

• Their tenure was to be 5 years.

• Their salaries were increased from £1000 to £1200.

 • There were to be 3 Indian members in the Council.

Government of India Act, 1919 – Other Salient Features

• This act provided for the first time, the establishment of a public service
commission in India.

• The act also provided that after 10 years, a statutory commission would be set up to
study the workings of the government. This resulted in the Simon Commission of
1927.

• It also created an office of the High Commissioner for India in London.

Merits of the Government of India Act 1919

• Dyarchy introduced the concept of responsible government.

• It introduced the concept of federal structure with a unitary bias.

• There was an increased participation of Indians in the administration. They held

some portfolios like labour, health, etc.

• For the first time, elections were known to the people and it created political
consciousness among the people.

• Some Indian women also had the right to vote for the first time.

Limitations of the Government of India Act 1919

• This act extended consolidated and communal representation.

• The franchise was very limited. It did not extend to the common man.

• The governor-general and the governors had a lot of power to undermine the
legislatures at the centre and the provinces respectively.

• Allocation of the seats for the central legislature was not based on population but
on the ‘importance’ of the province in the eyes of the British.

• The Rowlatt Acts were passed in 1919 which severely restricted press and
movement. Despite the unanimous opposition of Indian members of the legislative
council, those bills were passed. Several Indian members resigned in protest.
Q2 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT 1935
The Government of India Act 1935 was a significant milestone in the history of India's
constitutional development. It was a comprehensive piece of legislation enacted by the
British Parliament. It aimed to address the growing demands for self-governance and
autonomy in the Indian subcontinent. The Act aimed to introduce a federal system of
government, with a greater degree of autonomy for the provinces, while maintaining the
overall control of the British Crown.

What is Government of India Act, 1935?

The Government of India Act 1935 was a significant act of legislation enacted by the
Parliament of the United Kingdom. Its primary aim was to provide further provisions for the
governance of India, particularly in territories under direct British control. This act, which
received royal assent on 24th July 1935 and came into effect on 1st April 1937, played a
crucial role in shaping the constitutional framework in British India. It remained in force
until its repeal on 26th January 1950, marking a pivotal moment in India's path toward
independence and self-governance.

History of Government of India Act, 1935

The Government of India Act 1935 was the result of a long and complex process of
negotiations and deliberations between the British government and various Indian political
parties and leaders. It was preceded by several earlier Acts, such as the Government of
India Act 1919. This had introduced limited reforms and self-governance in the country.
However, the growing nationalist movement and the demand for complete independence
led to the need for a more comprehensive and substantial constitutional reform.

o The Act was based on the recommendations of the Simon Commission. The
commission had been appointed by the British government to study the Indian
political situation and suggest reforms.

o The Act was further shaped by the discussions and agreements of the three Round
Table Conferences held in London between 1930 and 1932. This involved
representatives from the British government and various Indian political parties.

o The final version of the Act was passed by the British Parliament in 1935 and came
into effect in 1937, after a period of transition and preparation.

Objectives of the Government of India Act 1935

The federal aspect of the Act aimed to align with the goals of the Conservative Party. In the
long term, Conservative leaders envisioned a dominion-status India under British
influence, dominated by Hindu princes and right-wing Hindus. The Act's medium-term
objectives included:

o Gaining Moderate Nationalist Support: The Act aimed to win the backing of
moderate nationalists by envisioning eventual dominion status, akin to
independence.

o Maintaining British Control: British control over the Indian Army, finances, and
foreign relations was intended to be retained for another generation.

o Securing Muslim Support: The Act sought to secure Muslim support by conceding
most of Jinnah's Fourteen Points.

o Persuading Princes to Join the Federation: The Act aimed to convince princes to
join the federation with conditions for entry unlikely to be surpassed.

o Terms for Princes: Princes would select their state's representative in the federal
legislature without pressure for democratization or state elections. The princely
states, constituting a quarter of India's population and wealth, would enjoy
significant representation.

All India Federation

All British Indian provinces, the Chief Commissioner’s provinces, and Indian states
(princely states) were to be organized into a federation. However, this was contingent upon
the following conditions:

o States with at least 52 allotted seats in the proposed council of states agree to join
the federation

o The aggregate population of the above states must be at least 50% of the total
population of Indian states

(Since these conditions were never met, the government of India continued to be carried
out according to the Govt of India Act 1919 up to 1946).

Federal Executive

o The Governor-General remained the pivot of the administration.

o The Dyarchy system was introduced. It means the rule of two: the elected Council of
Ministers and the Governor-General.
 o Subjects of administration were divided into two categories: Reserved Subjects,
which were to be administered by the Governor-General on the advice of executive
councilors who were not responsible to the legislature, and Transferred subjects,
which were to be administered by the Governor-General on the advice of the elected
Council of Ministers.

o Reserved subjects included Defence, External Affairs, Tribal areas, and

Ecclesiastical affairs (i.e., relating to church and clergy). All other subjects were
transferred.

o The Council of Ministers was to be responsible to the legislature.

o The Governor-General retained discretionary powers concerning India's ‘security’

and ‘tranquility.’

Federal Legislature

o The Government of India Act 1935 introduced a Bicameral Legislature at the federal
level. The Council of States was the upper house with directly elected members
from the provinces and members nominated by the princes in a ratio of 60:40. It was
a permanent body like the present-day Rajya Sabha, with one-third of members
retiring every five years. The Federal Assembly was the lower house, with members
indirectly elected from the provinces and nominated by the princes in a ratio of 2:1.

o Legislative matters were divided into three lists: Federal, Provincial, and concurrent.
This arrangement has been retained in the present-day Constitution of India under
the Seventh Schedule.

Provincial Government

The 1935 Act introduced Provincial autonomy, which replaced the dyarchy system provided
under the GoI Act 1919.

Provincial autonomy meaning

The provinces were granted a separate legal identity. They were freed from the directions
and control of the Governor-General and the Secretary of State of India. Henceforth, they
derived their legal authority directly from the British crown. They were also given autonomy
in financial matters related to borrowing and expenditure.

Executive
The Governor remained the crown’s representative to exercise authority on the king’s
behalf. He retained discretionary powers with minorities, civil services, tribal areas,
princely states, etc.

Legislature

All members were to be directly elected. Jurisdiction of the legislature extended to all
subjects in the provincial list. Ministers were to be responsible to the legislature. Thus, they
could be removed in case of a majority vote of the members.

Significance of the Government of India Act 1935

o The Government of India Act 1935 was a second milestone in developing a

responsible government in India. It introduced responsibility through dyarchy at the
federal level and autonomy at the provincial level.

o The 1935 act Introduced direct elections at the provincial and federal level, thus
heralding the start of democracy, albeit in baby steps.

o The concessions in the GoI Act of 1935 increased the political prestige of the Indian
National Congress and the morale of the Indian freedom fighters. This would prove
helpful in motivating further political struggle for an independent India.

o Large goals like Independence from an imperialist power through non-violent

agitation can only be achieved through small steps. The 1935 Act was one such
step.

Read the article on the Legislation in British India!

Role of the Act in the Formation of the Constitution

The Government of India Act 1935 played a significant role in the formation of the Indian
Constitution after the country gained independence in 1947. While the Act was ultimately a
product of British colonial rule, it laid the groundwork for the future constitutional
framework of independent India.

o The Act introduced a federal system of government, with a central government and
autonomous provincial governments, which became the basis for the federal
structure of the Indian Constitution.

o It also established the groundwork for the bicameral legislature. A Council of State
(upper house) and a Federal Assembly (lower house) were incorporated into the
Indian Parliament.
 o The Act's provisions for the distribution of powers between the central and
provincial governments, as well as the establishment of a system of governance,
served as a foundation for the Indian Constitution.

Limitations of the Government of India Act 1935

o Citizens of the princely states were not given the right to elect their representatives,
as members were to be nominated by the princes.

o No direct elections for members of the Federal Assembly.

o The communal and class-based electorates system was further extended, thus
dividing India further on these lines.

o 80 percent of the federal and 40 percent of the provincial budgets needed to be

revised.

o Governor-General retained the power to certify bills rejected by the legislature,

restore cuts in grants, issue ordinances, and exercise veto. These powers negated
the significance of all provisions of responsible government.

o In the provinces, the Governor retained the right to dismiss the government and
carry out administration indefinitely, thus negating the significance of provincial
autonomy.

o The franchise was extremely limited to around 14% of the population.

o A rigid constitution was provided, with the right to amendment in the hands of the
British parliament.

Q3 CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY OF INDIA

Constituent Assembly of India formed the Constitution and played a major role in the
formation and enactment of a lot of laws.

How was the Constituent Assembly of India Formed?

The Constituent Assembly of India was originally formed to frame the Constitution of India.
Provincial Assembly were the ones who elected this committee. M. N. Roy, a pioneer of the
Communist movement in India was the first person who proposed the idea of the
Constituent Assembly in 1934. This idea was later proposed by the Indian National
Congress in 1935.
There was a session held by the Indian National Congress presided by Pt. Jawahar Lal
Nehru in April 1935 at Lucknow. During this session, the members of Congress raised an
official demand for the Constituent Assembly. Although this demand was rejected.

In 1938, Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru made an impactful statement regarding the Constitution
and Assembly, ‘The constitution of free India must be framed, without outside interference,
by a constituent assembly elected based on adult franchise’

Later on, C. Rajagopalachari who was an independence activist and at the same time an
Indian statesman, writer and lawyer raised his voice for the making of Constituent
Assembly of India on 15 November 1939.

The British accepted the demand for a Constituent Assembly through their ‘August offer’ of
1940. The elections for the Assembly were held for the first time under the Cabinet Mission
Plan of 1946. To fulfill the purpose of its making, the Constituent Assembly framed the
Constitution of India and implemented it on 16 May 1946.

How were Members of the Constituent Assembly Elected?

The Provincial Assembly elected the members of the Constituent Assembly Of India by a
single, transferable-vote system. The total number of members of the Assembly were 389.
Among these members 292 represented the provinces, 93 were the representatives of the
princely states and 4 were from the chief commissioner provinces: Delhi, British
Baluchistan, Coorg and Ajmer-Merwara.

The elections that were assigned to the British Indian provinces for the 296 seats were
completed by August 1946. In this election, Congress won the majority of the seats: 208.
On the other hand, Muslim League had only won 73 seats. As they have lost in this election,
the Muslim League refused to work with Congress and the political situation got worse. The
Hindu-Muslim riots began and the Muslims demanded their own Constituent Assembly for
Muslims.

On 9 December 1946, the Constituent Assembly of India met for the first time. Later on,
they reassembled again on 14 August 1947 as a sovereign body.

Due to the partition between India and Pakistan, a separate constituent assembly of
Pakistan was framed on 3 June 1947. Since a new assembly was formed, new elections
were held for West Punjab and East Bengal. West Punjab became part of Pakistan and East
Bengal became Bangladesh.

After this reorganization, the total members of the Constituent Assembly were 299 and
they framed the Constitution of India. On 9 December 1946, these delegates sat for 2 years
11 months and 18 days to discuss what things and laws should be included in the
Constitution. Over these two years, the Constituent Assembly had 11 sessions. This
committee was chaired by B. R. Ambedkar.

Functions of the Constituent Assembly of India:

• Frame the Constitution of India and make sure that everyone in the country gets
equal rights and opportunities.

• The assembly adopted the National flag on July 22, 1947.

• Enact the laws

• In May 1949 the assembly approved India’s membership in the British

Commonwealth.

• On January 24, 1950, Dr Rajendra Prasad was elected the first President of India
through this committee.

• Adopted both the National anthem and National Song on January 24, 1950.

Criticism of the Constituent Assembly of India:

The major criticism of the Constituent Assembly of India was that it was not formed by
universal suffrage. Many feel that it was dominated by Congress members and lawyer-
politicians. There were allegations that since the Constituent Assembly was formed during
the British order it was not a sovereign body. The committee took an unreasonable time to
frame the Constitution. The committee consisted majorly of Hindus.

Are all these criticisms true? Not at all! The constituent assembly consisted of members
from all the religions, castes and cultures of the society. This means that equal opportunity
is given to all. The time taken by the constituent assembly to frame the Constitution is
reasonable since India is a big country and they have to account for people from all the
sections of the society.

The secular provisions in the Constitution is a proof that the Constitution gave equal rights
and opportunities to everyone irrespective of their caste and religion.

Conclusion

The formation of the Constituent Assembly was necessary since India urgently needed a
body that can frame and enact laws. The assembly took a lot of great initiatives and made
laws that guaranteed equal respect to all. There were a lot of difficulties in the formation of
the Constituent Assembly.
But, in the end, due to the support of all the Indians and prime leaders, the assembly was
finally formed. The Constituent Assembly consisted of members from all sections of the
society. They played a major role in the formation of the Constitution.

Q4 SOURCES AND OBJECTIVES OF INDIAN

CONSTITUTION
Introduction

The Indian Constitution, enacted on January 26, 1950, serves as the supreme law of India.
It lays down the framework for the political principles, structures, and processes of
governance in the country. The Constitution is a unique document that embodies the
hopes and aspirations of the Indian people. This paper will explore the sources from which
the Indian Constitution was derived, as well as its main objectives.

Sources of the Indian Constitution

The Constitution of India is a product of various influences, drawn from different countries,
historical contexts, and legal traditions. The key sources can be classified into several
categories:

1. Historical Sources

• Government of India Act 1935: This act served as a significant precursor to the
Indian Constitution. It introduced a federal structure and laid down the framework
for provincial autonomy. Key features included the establishment of a bicameral
legislature and the concept of a constitutional monarchy.

• Indian Independence Act 1947: This act marked the transition from British colonial
rule to independence, allowing for the formulation of a Constitution. It provided for
the establishment of a constituent assembly to draft the Constitution.

2. Foreign Sources

The framers of the Indian Constitution were inspired by several foreign constitutions and
political systems:

• British Constitution: The parliamentary system of governance, the concept of the

rule of law, and the idea of individual rights are rooted in British constitutional
 practices. The concept of the Cabinet and parliamentary supremacy are also
derived from this source.

• United States Constitution: The principles of federalism, the separation of powers,

and fundamental rights are heavily influenced by the U.S. Constitution. The idea of a
written Constitution, along with provisions for amendments, can also be traced
back to it.

• Irish Constitution: The Directive Principles of State Policy in the Indian Constitution
find their inspiration in the Irish Constitution, emphasizing social justice and
welfare.

• Canadian Constitution: The federal structure of the Indian Constitution is

influenced by the Canadian model, particularly the distribution of powers between
the central government and the states.

• French Constitution: The ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity are borrowed
from the French Revolution and incorporated into the Indian Constitution,
promoting the spirit of social justice.

3. Social and Cultural Sources

• Indian Traditions: The framers drew upon Indian social and cultural values,
emphasizing concepts of justice, liberty, and equality. The legacy of historical
documents like the Charter of the Indian National Congress and the Gandhian
philosophy also played a significant role.

• Civil Rights Movements: The struggles for independence and civil rights
movements in India informed the values and principles embedded in the
Constitution, especially regarding individual rights and social justice.

4. Judicial Interpretations and Practices

• Judicial Activism: Over the years, the Indian judiciary has played a crucial role in
interpreting the Constitution. Landmark judgments have helped shape
constitutional law and protect citizens' rights, further enriching the Constitution's
framework.

Objectives of the Indian Constitution

The Constitution of India is not merely a legal document; it embodies the dreams and
aspirations of the Indian people. The objectives can be distilled into several key themes:
1. Sovereignty

The Constitution establishes India as a sovereign nation, free from external control and
influence. Sovereignty is the essence of the Constitution, allowing the Indian state to
exercise authority and make decisions independently.

2. Social Justice

One of the primary objectives of the Constitution is to ensure social justice for all citizens.
The framers aimed to create a society where every individual enjoys equal rights,
opportunities, and access to resources. The provisions for affirmative action, especially for
marginalized communities, reflect this commitment.

3. Political Justice

The Constitution guarantees political justice by providing every citizen with the right to
participate in the political process. It establishes a framework for free and fair elections,
allowing citizens to exercise their right to vote and hold their representatives accountable.

4. Economic Justice

The Constitution seeks to eliminate economic disparities and promote equitable

distribution of resources. The Directive Principles of State Policy provide guidelines for the
state to work towards reducing economic inequalities and ensuring a decent standard of
living for all citizens.

5. Liberty and Fundamental Rights

The Constitution enshrines fundamental rights that protect individual freedoms and
liberties. These rights, including the right to freedom of speech, expression, and religion,
ensure that citizens can lead dignified lives free from discrimination and oppression.

6. Fraternity and Unity

The Constitution promotes the idea of fraternity, encouraging a sense of brotherhood

among the diverse communities of India. It aims to foster national integration and unity,
transcending barriers of caste, creed, and religion.

7. Rule of Law

The Constitution upholds the rule of law, ensuring that every citizen is subject to the law,
irrespective of their status. This principle guarantees accountability and justice, reinforcing
the idea that no one is above the law.

8. Democratic Governance
The Constitution establishes India as a democratic republic, where sovereignty rests with
the people. It creates a framework for representative governance, ensuring that elected
representatives reflect the will of the people.

Conclusion

The Indian Constitution is a remarkable document that synthesizes diverse sources and
embodies the aspirations of a pluralistic society. It is a living testament to the values of
justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. By drawing from various historical and
contemporary influences, the Constitution stands as a beacon of democracy and social
justice in the world. The objectives outlined in the Constitution continue to guide India’s
progress toward a more equitable and just society, making it an enduring source of
inspiration for generations to come.

Q5 ESTABLISHMENT OF LAW COMMISION OF INDIA

Certainly! Here’s a comprehensive overview of the establishment of the Law Commission
of India, structured into four sections for clarity:

1. Introduction

The Law Commission of India plays a crucial role in the country's legal system by reviewing
existing laws, suggesting reforms, and recommending new legislation. Established to
ensure that the laws of India are in tune with the changing socio-economic dynamics and
meet the needs of the populace, the Commission serves as an advisory body to the
Government of India.

2. Historical Background

2.1 Pre-Independence Era

The concept of a law reform body was first introduced in India during British rule. The Indian
Law Commission was established in 1834 under the chairmanship of Lord Macaulay to
codify laws and make them more systematic. However, the Commission was disbanded
after the codification of several laws.

2.2 Post-Independence Developments

After gaining independence in 1947, there was a growing recognition of the need for a
dedicated body to review and reform laws to reflect the democratic ethos of the new
nation. This led to the establishment of the Law Commission of India in 1955, aimed at
addressing the legal needs of the citizens and ensuring justice.

3. Establishment and Structure

3.1 Formation

The Law Commission of India was established by an executive order in 1955. The first Law
Commission, chaired by Justice B. P. Sinha, was tasked with the responsibility of identifying
outdated laws and recommending their repeal or amendment. The Commission operates
under the Ministry of Law and Justice and is constituted periodically.

3.2 Composition

The composition of the Law Commission consists of a chairperson (usually a retired judge
of the Supreme Court or High Court) and several other members, including legal experts,
retired judges, and other professionals with a background in law. The members are
appointed by the government for a fixed term, usually three years.

3.3 Functions

The primary functions of the Law Commission include:

• Reviewing existing laws and suggesting amendments.

• Drafting new legislation.

• Examining the impact of laws on society and recommending reforms.

• Conducting research on various legal issues.

• Engaging with stakeholders, including the judiciary, legal practitioners, and civil
society, to gather inputs on legal reforms.

4. Achievements and Challenges

4.1 Achievements

Over the years, the Law Commission has made significant contributions to the Indian legal
system, including:

• Drafting important legislations such as the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal
Procedure, and the Indian Contract Act.

• Recommending the repeal of obsolete laws and simplifying legal processes.

 • Addressing contemporary issues like gender justice, environmental law, and the
rights of marginalized communities.

4.2 Challenges

Despite its successes, the Law Commission faces several challenges, such as:

• Limited implementation of its recommendations by the government.

• Balancing diverse legal opinions and societal needs in a complex legal landscape.

• Adapting to rapidly changing socio-economic conditions and technological

advancements.

Conclusion

The Law Commission of India continues to be a vital institution in shaping the country’s
legal framework. By proposing necessary reforms and fostering legal awareness, it aims to
ensure that Indian laws are just, equitable, and aligned with the principles of justice and
democracy. As society evolves, the Commission's role will remain crucial in navigating the
complexities of law and governance in India.

REPORTS OF LAWCOMMISSION I, II, III, IV.

Certainly! Below is a summary of the first four reports of the Law Commission of India,
outlining their key objectives, recommendations, and impacts. Each report addresses
significant legal issues and proposes reforms aimed at improving the legal system in India.

Law Commission of India: Overview

The Law Commission of India was established in 1955 as a statutory body tasked with
recommending legal reforms in the country. It conducts thorough research and prepares
reports that propose changes to existing laws, aiming to make the legal system more
effective, accessible, and equitable.

Report I: The First Report (1956)

Objective
The First Report of the Law Commission was primarily focused on reviewing the legal
framework governing the administration of justice in India. It aimed to assess existing laws
and practices and recommend improvements.

Key Recommendations

Reorganization of Laws: The report emphasized the need to simplify and codify laws,
making them more accessible to the general public.

Reform of Civil Procedure: Suggested amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure to

expedite civil litigation, thereby reducing delays in the judicial process.

Legal Aid: Proposed measures for providing legal aid to the underprivileged sections of
society to ensure equal access to justice.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Encouraged the use of ADR mechanisms to resolve
disputes outside of traditional court systems, which can often be slow and cumbersome.

Impact

The recommendations led to various legislative reforms, particularly in the realms of civil
procedure and legal aid, fostering a more inclusive legal framework.

Report II: The Second Report (1958)

Objective

The Second Report focused on the need for legal reforms regarding the laws governing the
registration of documents and the transfer of property.

Key Recommendations

Registration of Documents: Suggested comprehensive reforms to the Indian Registration

Act to streamline the registration process and reduce bureaucratic hurdles.

Transfer of Property: Recommended amendments to the Transfer of Property Act, aimed at

clarifying ambiguous provisions and enhancing the rights of property owners.

Simplification of Procedures: Advocated for simplifying procedures associated with

property transactions to encourage transparency and efficiency.
Impact

The Second Report laid the groundwork for reforms in property law, which were crucial for
promoting real estate transactions and reducing disputes related to property rights.

Report III: The Third Report (1959)

Objective

The Third Report addressed the issues surrounding the criminal justice system, focusing on
offenses related to property and the effectiveness of existing laws.

Key Recommendations

Reform of Criminal Laws: Suggested a comprehensive review of the Indian Penal Code
(IPC) to remove outdated provisions and address emerging criminal behaviors.

Sentencing Guidelines: Proposed the establishment of clear sentencing guidelines to

ensure consistency and fairness in the criminal justice system.

Victim Rights: Highlighted the need to consider the rights of victims in the criminal justice
process, suggesting mechanisms for compensation and restitution.

Impact

The Third Report significantly influenced the evolution of criminal law in India, contributing
to reforms that emphasized fairness, victim rights, and the need for an adaptable legal
framework.

Report IV: The Fourth Report (1960)

Objective

The Fourth Report concentrated on the administration of justice and aimed to enhance the
efficiency of judicial proceedings.

Key Recommendations

Judicial Appointments: Proposed reforms in the process of judicial appointments to ensure

transparency and meritocracy.
Court Structure: Recommended a reorganization of the court system, including the
establishment of specialized courts to handle specific types of cases.

Judicial Training: Advocated for formal training programs for judges to improve their
knowledge of laws and enhance their judicial capabilities.

Impact

The recommendations from the Fourth Report led to significant changes in judicial
appointments and training, fostering a more competent and responsive judiciary.

Conclusion

The first four reports of the Law Commission of India laid the foundation for crucial legal
reforms in various areas, including civil, property, and criminal law. By identifying gaps in
the existing legal framework and proposing comprehensive recommendations, these
reports significantly influenced the development of a more effective and just legal system
in India. Their enduring legacy can be seen in the continuing efforts to reform laws and
improve access to justice across the country.

These reports not only aimed to modernize the legal system but also to ensure that it is
reflective of the values of justice, equity, and fairness, which are vital for the social and
economic development of the nation. The ongoing work of the Law Commission remains
vital in addressing contemporary legal challenges and adapting the legal framework to
meet the evolving needs of society.

KESHAV GANDHI
(2522207)