Judiciary Under British India: Background, Development Under Hastings, Cornwallis And Bentick!

The judiciary under British India, a crucial institution, held immense power and influence over millions. 

In this article, we will learn about Judiciary under British India. This forms a significant part of the UPSC IAS exam. UPSC Prelims and UPSC Mains Paper I have many questions about this topic. It is also an important topic for UPSC History Optional and essential for the UGC NET History exam. Every year over 5-7 questions on political history are in the question paper.

Background To Judiciary Under British India

The pre-colonial India of the Mughal era, or even earlier (including the ancient period), had a judicial system that did not adopt proper procedures, organise the law courts in a regular grading from the highest to the lowest, or distribute the courts in a manner that was proportionate to the territory they were to serve. Zamindars, local panchayats, or elders of the caste resolved most Hindu disputes.

The qazi, a position held by a religious person and stationed in provincial capitals, towns, and Qasbas (big villages), served as the judicial administration unit for Muslims. The rajas and Badshah were seen as the source of justice, and the administration of justice could be carried out arbitrarily. The formation of 'Mayor's Courts' in Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta by the East India Company in 1726 marks the commencement of a common law system based on documented judicial precedents. New components of the judicial system superseded the pre-existing Mughal legal system as the Company evolved from a trading company into a ruling force. 

Development Of The Judicial System In India Under Warren Hastings

To adjudicate civil disputes, districts formed District Diwani Adalats. These Adalats were put under the collector and applied Muslim law to Muslims and Hindu law to Hindus. 

District Fauzdari Adalats, supervised by an Indian officer and supported by qazis and muftis, was established to adjudicate criminal cases. Additionally, the collector had overall control over these Adalats. Fauzdari Adalats were where Muslim law was administered. The Sadar Nizamat Adalat in Murshidabad, led by a deputy nizam and assisted by a chief qazi and other members, had the authority to approve the death penalty and property purchase.

A Supreme Court was formed in Calcutta by the Regulating Act of 1773, and it had the authority to try any British subjects—including Indians and Europeans—residing in Calcutta and its associated enterprises. Both original and appellate jurisdictions were present. The Supreme Court's authority frequently conflicted with that of lower courts. This led to the development of the judiciary under British India.

Reforms Under Cornwallis (1786-1793)

In British India, changes were made to the judicial system. Circuit courts were created in cities like Calcutta, Dacca, Murshidabad, and Patna, and they had European judges. These courts handled civil and criminal appeals. The Sadar Nizamat Adalat, which used to be somewhere else, was moved to Calcutta and came under the control of the governor-general and Supreme Council members. 

The chief Qazi and chief mufti helped them. The District Diwani Adalat was changed to the District, City, or Zila Court. A district judge now had control over this court, while the collector managed revenue without having magisterial responsibilities. 

The Cornwallis Code separated the administration of justice and taxation in British India. European subjects also had to follow the rules. Government officials had to answer civil courts for their actions while working. This established the importance of the rule of law.

Reforms Under William Bentinck

The four Circuit Courts were eliminated, and the commissioner of revenue and the circuit now supervise collectors in place of them.

In Allahabad, Sadar Diwani Adalat and Sadar Nizamat Adalat were established for the benefit of the residents of the Upper Provinces.

Persian had previously been the exclusive language used in courts.

Now, the potential suitor might choose between Persian and a local tongue, while in the Supreme Court, English replaced Persian.

Under Macaulay, a Law Commission was established to codify Indian Judiciary under British India. The consequence was the creation of the Civil Procedure Code (1859), Indian Penal Code (1860), and Criminal Procedure Code (1861).

After Bentick

In 1860, it was stipulated that Europeans could not request special treatment outside criminal proceedings, and no judge of Indian descent may preside over their trials.

1865 three High Courts were established in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, combining the Supreme Court and the Sadar Adalats.

A Federal Court was established in 1937 due to a provision in the Government of India Act from 1935. This court had the authority to resolve conflicts between governments and to hear certain appeals from High Courts.

Positive Aspects Of the British Judicial System

The judiciary under British India had some positive aspects that helped shape the legal system. Let's explore some of these aspects of the judiciary under British India.

• Clear Laws: British India introduced clear laws, making things easier to understand.
• Fairness and Equality: They adopted fair rules that treated everyone equally, making sure things were just.
• Judges and Lawyers: They set up schools to educate judges and lawyers, making them more knowledgeable.
• People's Opinions Matter: They allowed regular people to be part of the decision-making process for certain crimes.
• Courts Nearby: They built courts in many places, making it easier for people to seek justice.
• Changing the Rules: They made changes to outdated laws to match the needs of the people.
• Courthouses and Libraries: They built special buildings for courts and libraries to help with legal matters.
• Influencing Other Countries: Other countries learned from British India's legal system and made similar changes.

Even though there were some problems, the judiciary under British India had positive aspects. Clear laws, fairness, educated judges and lawyers, involving regular people, following the law, accessible courts, solving problems, updating laws, protecting women's rights, important decisions, special buildings, business confidence, and inspiring other countries were some of the good things that happened. These positive aspects had a lasting impact on the legal systems of South Asian countries today.

Drawbacks Of Judiciary In British India

The judiciary under British India had some problems that made it unfair to the people. 

• Unfair Treatment: People from Europe were treated better than the Indians in the judiciary under British India. This made the system biased.
• Discrimination against Indians: Indians didn't receive equal treatment in the judicial system. They were treated as less important.
• Hard to Access Justice: It was difficult for regular people to get justice because the legal process was complicated and expensive. Only rich people could afford it.
• Language Barrier: The courts used English, which many Indians didn't understand. This made it harder for them to seek justice.
• No Indian Representation: Indians were not given important positions in the judiciary. This made the system unfair.
• No Jury Trials: Unlike fair systems, there were no jury trials in British India. This deprived the accused of a fair trial by peers.
• Overreliance on Police Testimony: Judges trusted the police too much and didn't consider the possibility of false statements. This led to wrongful convictions.
• Suppression of Political Opposition: The judiciary helped the British rulers by punishing people who disagreed with them.
• Lack of Independence: The judiciary was not independent and followed the orders of the British government. This made it unfair.
• Property Seizures: British laws allowed the seizure of Indian properties without a fair process. Many Indians lost their property unfairly.
• Harsh Punishments: Punishments were often too severe, especially for Indians. This created a sense of unfairness and inequality.
• Slow Justice System: The legal system was slow and inefficient, causing delays and frustration for people seeking justice.
• No Legal Aid: Poor and marginalised people couldn't afford lawyers to help them. This made it harder for them to get justice.
• Cultural Insensitivity: The judiciary didn't understand or respect Indian customs, leading to unfair decisions based on foreign laws.
• Repressive Laws: The British rulers introduced laws that restricted people's freedoms, making the system more unfair.

The judiciary in British India faced many challenges that made it unfair to the people. Racial bias, discrimination, limited access to justice, and lack of fairness were some of the problems. 

Conclusion

The judiciary system in British India was plagued by biases, discrimination, and a lack of fairness. Europeans received preferential treatment, while Indians faced unequal treatment and limited access to justice. 

Testbook provides a set of comprehensive notes for different competitive exams. Testbook is always on the list because of its best quality assured products. It provides live tests, mocks, Content pages, G.K. and current affairs videos, and more. To study more topics for UPSC and UGC NET, download the Testbook App now!