Judiciary under British Rule

The evolution of the modern judicial system in India trace its roots to the administrative experiments of the British East India Company (EIC) and, subsequently, the British Crown. The British replaced the existing Mughal and indigenous legal systems (based on Shastras, Shariat, and local customs) with a codified, centralized, and hierarchical judicial structure.

Phase I: Early Judicial Reforms (1772–1793)

Warren Hastings’ Reforms (Plan of 1772)

Warren Hastings was the first to establish a structured judicial system by setting up distinct courts for civil and criminal administration in each district.

• Mofussil Diwani Adalat: Established in districts to resolve civil disputes. It was presided over by the District Collector. Hindu law applied to Hindus, and Muslim law to Muslims.
• Mofussil Faujdari Adalat: Established for criminal cases. It was presided over by Indian judges (Qazis and Muftis), but supervised by the District Collector.
• Sadar Courts: Appellate courts were established at Calcutta:
  • Sadar Diwani Adalat: The highest civil appellate court, presided over by the Governor-General and members of the Council.
  • Sadar Nizamat Adalat: The highest criminal appellate court, presided over by the Daroga-i-Adalat (appointed by the Nawab) under the supervision of the Governor-General and Council.

Regulating Act of 1773 and the Supreme Court

• Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William (Calcutta): Established in 1774 as a Court of Record.
• Composition: It consisted of a Chief Justice (Sir Elijah Impey, the first Chief Justice) and three regular judges.
• Jurisdiction: Covered all British subjects, Company employees, and inhabitants of Calcutta (under certain conditions). It operated under English Common Law.
• Jurisdictional Conflict: The Act did not clearly define the boundary between the Supreme Court and the Governor-General-in-Council, leading to frequent deadlocks. This was mitigated by the Act of Settlement 1781, which exempted the official actions of the Governor-General and Council from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Lord Cornwallis’ Reforms (1786–1793) & The Cornwallis Code

Lord Cornwallis separated the executive from the judiciary and introduced structural hierarchy through the Cornwallis Code (1793).

• Separation of Powers: The District Collector was divested of judicial duties, making the office purely responsible for revenue collection. District Judges were appointed to head the Mofussil Diwani Adalats.
• Circuit Courts: Provincial Courts of Circuit were established at Calcutta, Murshidabad, Dacca, and Patna. These courts acted as criminal courts of appeal and were presided over by European covenanted servants.
• Abolition of Court Fees: Court fees were abolished to make justice accessible, and legal professionals (Vakeels) were recognized.
• Graded Hierarchy of Civil Courts (1793):
  • Munsif’s Court (headed by Indian officers for small claims)
  • Registrar’s Court (headed by European officers)
  • District Courts (Zilla/City Courts)
  • Provincial Courts of Appeal
  • Sadar Diwani Adalat
  • King-in-Council (for suits valued above Rs. 50,000)

Phase II: Expansion and Consolidation (1798–1833)

Lord Wellesley (1798–1805)

• Wellesley separated the judicial functions from the Governor-General-in-Council in the Sadar Adalats.
• Three judges were appointed to head the Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat, ensuring the executive executive body no longer acted directly as the highest court of appeal in India.

Lord William Bentinck’s Reforms (1828–1835)

Bentinck overhauled the system to reduce administrative expenses and speed up the disposal of cases.

• Abolition of Circuit Courts: The Provincial Courts of Circuit were abolished. Their duties were transferred to Commissioners of Revenue and Circuit.
• Establishment of Sadar Courts at Allahabad: A separate Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat were established at Allahabad in 1831 to cater to the Western Provinces.
• Introduction of Vernacular Languages: The mandatory use of Persian in courts was replaced. Vernacular languages were permitted in lower courts, while English became the official language of the higher courts.
• Indianization of Judiciary: Bentinck created the posts of Principal Sadar Amins, Sadar Amins, and Munsifs, enabling Indians to occupy higher positions in the subordinate judiciary.

Phase III: Codification of Laws and High Courts (1833–1861)

Charter Act of 1833 and Law Commissions

• First Law Commission (1834): Established under the chairmanship of Lord Macaulay. It aimed to codify Indian laws to replace the chaotic mix of English law, Hindu law, Muslim law, and local customs.
• Key Outcomes of Codification:
  • Civil Procedure Code (1859)
  • Indian Penal Code (1860)
  • Criminal Procedure Code (1861)

Indian High Courts Act, 1861

• This Act amalgamated the parallel judicial systems of the Company (Sadar Adalats) and the Crown (Supreme Courts).
• High Courts were established at Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay in 1862.
• A fourth High Court was established at Allahabad in 1866.

Phase IV: The Federal Structure (1935–1950)

Government of India Act, 1935

• Federal Court of India: Established in Delhi in 1937.
• Jurisdiction: It possessed original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction. It resolved disputes between provinces and the federal center, and interpreted the Government of India Act, 1935.
• Composition: Consisted of a Chief Justice and not more than six puisne judges. Sir Maurice Gwyer was its first Chief Justice.
• Limitation: It was not the ultimate court of appeal; appeals could still be taken to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London.

Abolition of Privy Council Jurisdiction Act, 1949

• This Act abolished the appellate jurisdiction of the Privy Council over Indian courts, paving the way for complete judicial sovereignty.
• On January 28, 1950, the Federal Court of India was replaced by the Supreme Court of India.

Institutional Framework: Comparative Summary

Key Characteristics and Limitations of British Judiciary

Rule of Law

• The British introduced the concept of the Rule of Law, dictating that administrative actions must be governed by laws rather than the whim of the ruler. However, in practice, bureaucrats and European subjects enjoyed significant immunities.

Equality Before Law

• The system established legal equality irrespective of caste or religion. However, this equality did not extend to Europeans. Under the legal framework, Europeans could only be tried by European judges. The Ilbert Bill Controversy (1883), which attempted to allow senior Indian magistrates to try Europeans, faced fierce resistance from the British community and was subsequently modified.

Critical Limitations

• Expensive and Protracting: The system introduced complex legal procedures, court fees, and the necessity of lawyers, making justice unaffordable for the rural poor.
• Litigation-Heavy: The replacement of traditional village Panchayats with formal courts led to a massive rise in lingering property and civil disputes.
• Foreign Language: The use of English in higher courts alienated the common masses from the judicial process.

Prelims-Specific Trivia

• First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at Calcutta: Sir Elijah Impey (1774).
• First Law Member of the Governor-General’s Executive Council: Lord Macaulay (appointed via the Charter Act of 1833).
• First Indian to be appointed as a High Court Judge: Sambhunath Pandit (Calcutta High Court, 1863).
• The First Indian Federal Court Judge: Sir Mohammad Sulaiman and Hari Singh Gour were among the early distinguished legal minds associated with it, with Sir Hari Singh Gour being a prominent member of the central legislature driving legal education.
• Lex Loci Report (1840): Emphasized the importance of codifying substantive Indian laws, leading to a uniform legal system excluding personal laws of Hindus and Muslims.