Mayor’s court of 1726, establishment of supreme court, regulation act 1773, case of Raja Nand Kumar, Cossijurah 

Theoretical overview

The Court of Judicature established in 1718 continued till February 10, 1728 when it was replaced by the Mayor’s

Causes of introduction of charter 1726

1. Working of courts was unsatisfactory
2. Growth in trade and increasing population. More cases coming to court.
3. For uniformity in judicial administration.
4.  Encouraged by Madras Corporation

Charter of 1726

The courts functioning in Presidency towns in India were Company courts and derived their authority not from the British Crown but from the Company The judges were supposed to apply English law but they did not have adequate knowledge of law. With a view of introducing a uniform system of judicial administration in presidency towns, the Crown by the Charter of 1726 provided for the establishment of Corporations and setting up of Mayor’s court at three Presidencies of Bombay, Madras and Calcutta. Thus, the Charter introduced British system of courts for the administration of justice in Indian settlements.

The main provisions of the Royal charter of 1726 were as follows

1. Establishment of a Corporation at Bombay and Calcutta: The Charter provided for the establishment of a corporation at Bombay and Calcutta like the one which already existed in Madras Each of the Presidency towns was to have a corporation consisting of a Mayor and 9 Aldermen The Mayor and 7 of the Aldermen were to be natural born British, while the 2 Aldermen could be of any nationality The Mayor was to be elected annually by the Aldermen. The Aldermen were to hold office for life or till their residence in the presidency. The Governor in council could remove the Aldermen on a reasonable cause
2. Mayor’s Court in Presidency Towns: By the Charter of 1726 Mayor’s court was empowered to decide all the civil cases within the presidency town and the factories. An appeal form the decision of the Mayor’s court lay to the Governor and council. But in cases involving the value of subject matter above 1,000 pagodas, a further appeal went to the King-in-Council
3. Crime and Punishment: The Mayor’s court had no criminal jurisdiction. It was only a court of civil and testamentary jurisdiction The Governor and five senior members of the council were appointed as Justices of Peace in each Presidency for the administration of criminal justice. They could arrest persona accused of crimes and punish them for petty offences. They also constituted a Court of Commissioners, Oyer, Terminer and Goal Delivery. They were also required to hold quarter sessions four times a year. The Charter of 1726 introduced the trial of criminal cases with the help of Grand jury and Petty juries Thus, procedures of Criminal Judicature of England were introduced through this Charter in India. 

The Crown’s Charter Of 1753

The conflicts and clashes between Mayor’s court and the Governor-in-council created much confusion in the Presidencies in India. The company requested the British King to issue fresh charter to introduce suitable amendments in the earlier Charter of 1726.

 The main features of the Charter of 1753 were as below:

1. Revival of Mayor’s Court with Modifications: The British King George II granted a new Royal Charter for Presidencies of Madras, Bombay and Calcutta and jurisdiction of all the three Mayor’s courts of Presidencies were modified to overcome the shortcomings of its earlier working

2. Mayor’s Courts were Subordinate to the Governor in Council: In order to end the dispute between the Mayor’s court and corporation on the one hand and the Governor in council on the other, the Charter of 1753 brought the corporation of each presidency under the control of the council by changing the mode of appointment of Mayor and Aldermen Under the new charter, the Governor in council was empowered to select the Mayor out of a panel of two names elected by the Mayor and Aldermen. The council assumed full power to appoint Aldermen in the corporation and dismiss them. Thus, the Mayor’s court war completely subordinated to the Executive Council by the Charter of 1753

3. Natives were to be governed by their own Laws: The charter provided that the Mayor’s courts were not to try civil actions between natives, such actions being left to be decided by the natives themselves. The Mayor’s court could decide only those cases of the natives in which both the parties consented to accept the jurisdiction and decision of the count

4. Change in Oath System: To end the controversy regarding taking of oath, the charter expressly provided that the native Indians and Christians could be allowed to take oath in such a manners they deemed most binding on their conscience to speak out the truth

5. Legislative Power under the Charter:  Until 1726, the law-making powers were vested in the Company which could be exercised only by the Board of Directors of the Company in England. But this was not very convenient because the directors hardly had any knowledge about the local conditions in India and therefore, the laws framed by them were ineffective. Therefore, the Charter of 1726 now empowered the Governor-in-council of each presidency town to make byelaws, rules and ordinances for the regulation of presidency and they would also prescribe punishment for the breach of such laws and rules. Thus, under the Charter of 1720, three subordinate legislative authorities functioned simultaneously. One each in thro Presidencies

6. Depositing of Court Fee by the Litigants :The charter provided that the litigants would deposit money of court fee with the government and not with the courts. This was intended tease the burden of courts 
7. Establishment of the Court of Requests The Charter of 1753 provided for the establishment of a new Court called the court of requests in each Presidency town to decide civil cases up to 5pagodas. The civil cases exceeding this value were to be decided by the Mayor’s Court The object of establishing courts of requests was to provide cheap and quick justice

Judicial Arrangement under the Charter of 1753:

1. The Court of Requests: It was to decide summarily, the petty civil cases up to 5 pagodas. Now these cases could not be tried by the Mayor’s court
2. The Mayor’s Court :This court had jurisdiction to hear civil cases involving a sum exceeding  5 pagodas. It had jurisdiction over the cases of natives provided both the parties to the suit voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of the court
3. 3 The Court of Governor in Council: This court had exclusive jurisdiction over criminal cases, as the Governor-in-council acted as justices of peace and held quarter sessions to decide criminal cases. It was also empowered to hear appeals from the Mayor’s court.
4. The Court of King in Council: The King-in-council in England was empowered to hear appeals from the Court of Governor-in-council in all civil cases involving a sum of 1,000 pagodas or more

Defects of the Charter of 1753:

1. The Mayor’s court of each presidency consisted of company’s servants who were appointed by the Governor-in-council Thus, the court lost all its in independence.
2. The servants of the company were allowed to carry on their private trade Consequently, there were often disputes between them and the natives The Mayor’s courts favored their fellowmen
3. Governor-in-council had jurisdiction over civil as well as criminal cases. They were also executive heads of their presidency and they exercised certain legislative powers as well. Thus, all the three functions were centralized in a single authority. 
4. The judges of the Mayor’s court were laymen and not well versed in law. They were supposed to follow the English law but had no knowledge of it.

5. The tentorial jurisdiction of all the courts established under the Charter of 1753 was confined to the respective presidency.

In spite of these defects it made a good beginning for the establishment of a uniform judicial system in the Company’s settlements on the basis of English law and procedure In 1774 the Mayor’s court of Calcutta was replaced by the Supreme Court. The Mayor’s courts at Bombay and Madras were replaced by the Recorder Court in 1798 by the Charter issued by King George III on Feb 1, 1798 for this purpose.

Establishment of Supreme Court Under The Crown’s Charter of 1774

In pursuance of the power given by the Regulating Act, 1773, the Crown sued a Charter on March 26, 1774 establishing the Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta The Charter settled the various details relating to the Court and abolished the legal provisions of the Charter of 1753, which meant the supersession of the Mayor’s Court and the Court of Oyer and Termine and Gaol Delivery Composition of Supreme Court-According to 5 13 of the Regulating Act, 1773, the Supreme Conn was constituted to be a Court of Record. It consisted of a Chief Justice and three Puisne Judges to be appointed by the Crown lo act during the pleasure of the Crown The Charter appointed Sir Elijah Imply as the Chief Justice, and Robert Clambers, SC Le Maistre and John Hyde as the three Puisne Judges They were Barristers of not less than five years standing. All the Judges were declared to be Justices of the Peace and Coroners within Bengal, Bihar and Orissa In authority and jurisdiction, they were tube in the position of Judges of the King’s Bench in England. The Chief Justice was given a casting vote. Writs, summons, rules, orders and other mandatory, process issued by the Court were to run in the Crown’s name.

 Jurisdiction of Supreme Court The various jurisdictions of the Supreme Court were as under

1. Original Jurisdiction in Civil Cases-The Court was authorized to hear examine, try and determine all civil causes, suits and actions against

• The Company
• The Mayor and Aldermen of Calcutta
• The Crown’s subjects who were residents within Bengal, Bihar and Orissa or who should have resided there or who should have any debts, effects or estate real or personal, within the same,
• Any person who was employed by, or was directly or indirectly in the service of the Company, or the Mayor and Alderman or any of the Crown’s subjects, and
• Any inhabitant of India residing in the said Provinces if he entered into an agreement in writing with any of the Crown’s subjects that in case of dispute between them, the matter should be determined in the Supreme Court, provided the cause of action exceeded the sum offs 500.

2. Jurisdiction as a Court of Equity-The Supreme Court was to be a Court of Equity in the English legal sense of the word. It was given full power 10 administer justice in a summary manner as nearly as might be according to the rules and proceedings of the High Court of Chancery in Great Britain. It could issue Subpoena and other process to compel the appearance and answer upon oath of the opposite party, as well as to compel obedience to the decree and order of the Court in such manner and form and lo such effect as the High Chancellor of Great Britam did.
3. Jurisdiction as a Criminal Court-The Supreme Court was to be a Court of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery in and for the town of Calcutta, the of 1-ort William and Subordinate factories. In this capacity its authority was like that of the Justices of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery in England. It has to administer criminal justice in all cases of grave offences and misdemeanours in such manner and form or as nearly as The conditions and circumstances of the place and persons admitted of, as the Court of Qyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery did in England. The Charter provided for the employment of Grand Jury and Petty Jury, summoned by tine Sheriff, composed of the subjects of Great Britain residing in Calcutta.
4. Jurisdiction as an Ecclesiastical Court-The Supreme Court was given ecclesiastical jurisdiction over British subjects residing in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, It was to administer and execute ecclesiastical law as used and exercised in the diocese of London so far as the local circumstances required. The Court night grant probates of wills and testaments of the deceased British subjects and letters of administration in regard to their effects if they died intestate or without appointing executors of their wills.
5. Jurisdiction as an Admiralty Court The Supreme Court was declared to be a Court of Admiralty for Bengal. Bihar and Orissa to hear and try all cases, civil and maritime, in the same manner as the High Court of Admiralty did in I-nglund It was given power to try, with the help of a Petty Jury of British subjects residents in the town of Calcutta, and punish all treasons, murders, piracies and other crimes maritime, committed on the high-seas, in accordance with the laws and customs of the High Court of Admiralty in England.
6. Jurisdiction as to Supervision Over Inferior Courts-The Court of Requests, as established in 1753, the Courts of the Quarter Sessions to be held by the Justices of the Peace, Sheriffs, and other Magistrates were put under the control and supervision of the Supreme Court in the same manner and form as the inferior courts and Magistrates in England were under the order and control of the Court of King’s Bench.
7. Jurisdiction as to Appeals: A civil appeal might be taken to the King in Council Ft was to be filed within a period of six months of the delivery of judgment and the matter in dispute was to be over 1,000 Pagodas in value Criminal appeals might also be preferred to the King in-Council, but in respect of them the Supreme Court was given full power and absolute discretion to allow or deny such appeals.
8. Power to Suspend Execution of Sentence-The Supreme Court was empowered to reprieve and suspend the execution of any capital sentences in hard cases which presented a proper occasion for mercy and wherein it might be proper to remit the general seventy of the law. The records of the cases with the reasons for recommending the criminals to mercy were to be transmitted to the King in-Councilor consideration.
9. Immunity Available to Councilors and Judges-The Governor General, the Councilors, the Chief Justice and the Judges of the Supreme Court were not liable tube arrested or imprisoned in any action, suit or proceeding except in cases of treason or felony

The merits of this court are as under-

1. The Supreme Court judges were professional lawyers, sent from England appointed by crown and holding their post during its pleasure. Thus, judges had knowledge of English law and could deal with the cases effecting life and property of the people.
2. The tenure of the judges was independent from the wishes of company of Calcutta Govt This gave independence to judiciary
3. For the first time judiciary was divorced from the executive Thus, legality of administrative action of the company’s servants could be judged byte legal norms
4. The Supreme Court was simultaneously a Court of Law as well as a Court of Equity and having different kinds of jurisdiction as admiralty and ecclesiastical. In this way it was a great improvement of judicial system prevailing even in England at that time.
5.  The Supreme Court was to have powers to supervise and control over the company’s courts and had powers to issue writs. 

Defects of the Supreme Court:

1. 1 Vague Jurisdiction of Supreme Court-Provisions of Regulating Act in nation Calpe whereas relating to Bengal Bihar and Orissa, they were quite vague and uncertain. The Act distinguished between Calcutta on the one hand and Bengal bar and Orissa on the other hand powers for admiration and legislation regarding Calcutta were vested Governor –General in Council but no such specific powers were seated in relation to Diwani territory. Therefore it was doubtful as to whether the powers of Supreme Court extended to Diwani territory or not.
2. Vague Provinces of Law to be Applied by Supreme Court: Certain term like ‘British Subjects’ , ‘Subjects of His Majesty’, ‘Subject of Great Britain’ , of us and ourheirs which were used to define jurisdiction of Supreme Court were not defined clearly.
3.  Conflict between the Executive and Jurisdiction: Supreme Court was given power to examine the legality of the Dewan Act of the company’s servants of His Majesty subjects or person directly or indirectly collection do not come under courts jurisdiction Unfortunately provision of the Act did not make clear as to whether Management etc of revenue vested in council or not.
4. Provision relating to relations between Supreme Court and Governor-General and Council were uncertain The Governor General and Council were of the opinion do they were beyond the jurisdiction of the count their act whether official or individual can be questioned in the count On the other hand court took cognizance to the official and individual acts. This anomaly made relation of both of these two distasteful 
5. Conflicts Between the Supreme Court and Company’s: Court Because of establishment of Supreme Court two independent and parallel judicial system came into existence Adalat in Diwani territory and Supreme Court at Calcutta There was no mutual relationship between the two, therefore, conflict between the two systems became inevitable Patna and Kamaluddin Cases are the examples of this conflict.

Regulating Act 1773

British Parliament appointed 2 parliamentary committees in 1772 to initiate immediate steps to end the company’s maladministration The Government of Lord North appointed Select Committee and a secret committee to enquire into the affairs of the East India Company The Select Committee submitted its final report on May 13, 1773 on the basis of which a hill was introduced on May 18, 1773 by Lond North to regulate the Government of the East India. The company petitioned against the bill but all invain. The bill was vehemently supported by the majority of the members in the House of commons and in the House of Lords.

Constitutional Significance of Regulating Act, 1773: The Act not only recognized the Company as apolitical body which controlled territorial domain and was discharging political and military functions, but also established the right of British Parliament to regulate the affairs of the company and shape ns political destiny by altering its form of governance in India. The Act recognized the existence of British sovereignty over Indian settlements and the territories won by war.

Background Which Led to the Enactment of Regulating Act of 1773: The company had assumed real power of the government of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa after the Battle of Buxer in 1764 but it never asserted its authority and retained Nawab as its nominee. The Nawab failed to give a clean administration. After famine of 1770 and financial crises the company approached the Government of England for loan.

The serial pore of the company had attracted the attention of the British Parliament and it had taken nete of the company’s assumption of territorial sovereignty in this region. A secret committee was also appointed by the Bol Parliament to investigate into the affairs of the company The report of Secres Committee revealed serious defects in the working of the company These reports ultimately led so the enactment of the Regulating Act, 1773.

Main Features of the Regulating Act: The main objects of the Regulating Act were to reform the constitution of the company at home, so reform the company’s Government in India and to provide remedies against illegalities and oppressions committed by the servants of the company in India To achieve this end the Act permitted the company to retain its Indian possessions but its management was brought under control of the crown and parliament.

1. Clauses Affecting the Constitution of the Company in England: Prior to 1773 the Company’s constitution in England consisted of a Court of Directors having 24 members elected anally by the Court of Proprietors The tenure of Directors being limited only to one year, they could not pursue a stable policy and were often engaged in appeasing the proprietors to ensure their re-election. With a view tor removing these defects and to secure stability and continuity the Regulating Act terminated the annual election of the Directors and fixed their term at four years The Act also provided that the Directors were to lay before the Ministers the copies of all letters and advices received from the GG in council in India The Governor General in council of Bengal and the Governors of Bombay and Madras were directed to give due obedience to the orders of the Directors and also to keep them informed about the matters affecting company’s interest The clause was meant to assert parliamentary control over the company.

2. Provisions Dealing with the Company’s Central Govt. in India: Prior to this Act the presidencies of Bengal, Bombay and Madras were functioning independently without any coordination They received instructions directly from the Court of Directors The Regulating Act sought to establish a Central Govt of the Company in India by effecting the changes in constitution of the company’s executive at Calcutta The Governor of Bengal was henceforth to be known as the Governor General of Bengal He was to be assisted by a council of 4 members. The councilors were to be appointed for 5 years but they could be removed from office earlier by the King upon representation made by the Court of Directors

3. The Civil & Military Government of the Presidency of Fort Willam was vested in the Governor General in-Council He was also empowered to make rules, regulations and ordinances for the “good order and civil Government of the company’s settlement at Fort William and the factories and places subordinate thereto The ordinance, rules and regulations so made were to be just and reasonable and not repugnant to the laws of England. They were not to have effect until registered in the SC of Fort William and published by it with the consent of the Court of Directors. The Crown could disallow all or any one of such laws on an application made by any person or persons in India or in Britain within a period of 2 years.

4. Provisions Relating to Presidencies: The Regulating Act empowered the GG-in-council to superintend and control the Government and Management of the Presidencies of Madras and Bombay. The Governors-in-council of these Presidencies were required to give obedience to the orders of the GG in council and were required to submit to the Supreme Government any advice or transactions. The Presidency Governments were to forward all rules and regulations formed by them to GG-in-Council The Presidency governments disobeying these provisions could be suspended by orders of the Governor General Council.

5. The Establishment of a Supreme Court at Fort William :The Act empowered the Crown to establish by Charter or letters patent a Supreme Court at Fort William .

6. Reforms of Certain Abuses: The Act tried to check corruption and bribery which were so rampant among the servants of the company by prohibiting the entire staff in the Company’s service from receiving presents, or pecuniary rewards directly or indirectly, from any of the Indian Princes.  

Trial of Raja Nand Kumar Case (1775)

The trial of Raja Nand Kumar was the first decisive event during the early stage of the growing bitterness between the Supreme Court and the Council. The trial gained a great historical importance as it formed an integral part of the charge on which Warren Hastings and Impey were impeached by the House of Commons after their return to England.

 Events before the Trial: Raja Nand Kumar, who was once Governor of Hugh under NawahSiraj-ud-daulah in 1756 and later due to his loyalty to the English Company in 1757 was nicknamed as Black Colonel during Clive’s period, brought several charges of bribery and corruption against Governor General Warren Hastings in 1775

On March 11 1775 Raja Nand Kumar gave a letter containing complaints against Warren Hastings to Francis, a member of the Council Francis presented that letter before the Council, at its meeting the same day. In his letter of complaints RajaNand Kumar stated that in 1772 Warren Hastings, when be was Governor, accepted from him as bribe a sum of Rs 1.04 105for appointing Gurudas as Dewan and from MunniBegamRs 2.50.000 for appointing her guardian of the infant Nawah Mubarak-ud-daulah.

On March 13, 1775 the Council received another letter from Nand Kumar On the same day the Council discussed the subject matter of the complaint. In his second letter Raja Nand Kumar offered to produce vouchers supporting his charges of bribery against Warren Hastings In the Council meeting. Monson moved a motion to call Nand Kumar before it. Warren Hastings, who was presiding at the meeting as Governor-General, opposed thus motion stating that neither will he preside over the meeting of the Council as his character was being discussed, nor will he recognize the authority of the members of the Council to sit as Judges to hear any case against him. In spite of Hastings opposition, Monson’s motion was carried by a majority of votes in the Council Warren Hastings dissolved the meeting of the Council and left his seat. The majority of the members in the Council expressed the view that Governor-General Warren Hastings was not empowered to dissolve the meeting of the Council and in place of Warren Hastings they elected Clavering to occupy the presiding seat at the meeting.

The Council by majority found that the charges levelled by him against Governor-General Warren Hastings were true. They held that Warren Hastings received a sum of Rs. 3,54,105 as bribery. By a resolution, therefore, the Council directed Warren Hastings to pay the same amount into the Company’s Treasury

Facts of the Case: A few months latter, Raja Nand Kumar was arrested with Fawkes and Radhacharan for conspiracy at the instance of the Governor General and Barwell The trial of Nand Kumar for conspiracy continued together with his another trial for forgery. In the conspiracy case, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in July 1775. Fawke was fined but judgment was reserved against Nand Kumar on account of forgery case Warren Hastings pooled his resources to prove another charge namely of forgery against Nand Kumar and thus to get rid of him under the provisions of the English Act of 1729 

The charge of forgery against Nand Kumar, which came before the Supreme Court in May 1775, was with respect to a band or deed clammed as an acknowledgement of debt from Bulak Das the Banker which it is said, was executed by him in 1765 Mohan Prasad brought a charge of forgery on 6th May 1775 before the Justices of the Peace for the town of Calcutta. Le Maistre and Hyde acted as Magistrates, heard the pase and examined the evidence for the prosecution till late in the might The Magistrates, in the capacity of the Justices of the Peace, being satisfied with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses ordered the Sheriff and Keeper of His Majesty’s prison at Calcutta to keep Nand Kumar in safe custody until he should be discharged in due course of law

On 7th May 1775, Mohan Prasad gave a bond to prosecute Nand Kumar in the Supreme Court On the basis of it, the trial of Nand Kumar began before the Chief Justice and three puisne Judges of the Supreme Court on the 8th May, 1775 Out of the twelve members of the jury two were Eurasians and the remaining were Europeans having long residence in the town of Calcutta. On the advice of Vansittart Mohan Prasad engaged Durham as his counsel and Alexander Elliott acted as interpreter of the court Thomas Earrer was appointed defence counsel of Nand Kumar.

Nand Kumar pleaded not guilty and stated that his entire transactions with Bolaka Das were correct and genuine The trial of Nand Kumar began on 8th June 1775 and continued for a period of eight days without any adjournment The Court sat every day from 8 am and witnesses were examined till late at night. The trial continued till the midnight of June 15, 1775 On the 16th June, in the morning, Chief Justice Impey summed up the whole case The Judges gave unanimous verdict of “guilty” and the jury also declared their verdict of “guilty” Rejecting all defence pleas the Chief Justice paced entice of death on Nand Kumar under an Act of Brush Parliament, which was passed in 1729 The defence counsel decided to take an appeal to the King-in-Council and petitioned the Court to stay the execution of the sentence. The Court rejected the petition Again Council received a letter from the Nawal a suspension of the sentence and the pleasure of His Majesty was known. The Council forwarded the letter to the Supreme Court. No action was taken on it. Raja Nand Kumar, was thus hanged on August 5, 1775, at 8 am at Cooly Bazar near Fort William 

Two Important Questions Raised in the Trial: First, whether Nand Kumar was under the jurisdiction of the Court? Second, whether the English Act of 1729 which made forgery a capital offence and under which Raja Nand Kumar was executed was extended to India?

Objection regarding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over Raja Nand Kumar was based on the ground that before the advent of the Supreme Court, the Indians in Bengal were tried by their own men in their own local criminal courts In this case as the offence was committed before the advent of the Supreme Court, Nand Kumis could be tried only by Faujdari Adalats and not by the Supreme Court

On the second question, regarding applicability of the Act of 1729 to India and the execution of Raja Nand Kumar fox forgery, there was a difference of opinion even amongst the Judges Chambers I stated that the Act of 1729 was particularly adopted to the local policy of England where for reasons as well political as commercial, it had been found necessary to guard against the falsification of paper currency and credit, by laws the most highly penal, that he thought the same reasons did not apply to the then state of Bengal Impey, Hyde and Le Mastre regretted to agree with Chamber’s view. Chief Justice Impey declared his firm belief, first, that the Statute of 1729 did apply to India, second that the English criminal law in general and the Statute of 1729 in particular had been administered in India by English Courts that functioned before the advent of the Supreme Court third, the Judges had no option to try forgery under any different law and mentioned that English law was extended to India under the provisions of Charter of 1753 and the Statute of 1729 was extended to India by that Charter of 1753 as it was passed before this Charter. Whereas in English law was extended India under the Charter of 1726

Some Peculiar Features of the Trial: The decision of the Supreme Court in the trial of RajaNand Kumar became a subject of great controversy and doubts were also expressed due to certain peculiar features of the trial, which may be given as follows-

• Every Judge of the Supreme Court cross-examined the defence witnesses due to which whole defence of Raja Nand Kumar collapsed. It was also not legal according to the rules of procedure prevailing at that time Criticising the attitude of the Judges. H.E. Busteed wrote, “The desire of the judges was to break down Nand Kumar’s witnesses, in particular the Chief Justice’s manner was bad throughout and that the summing up was unfavorable.

• After the trial, when Nand Kumar was held guilty by the Court he filed 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.

• 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 under the Statute made applicable to Nand Kumar 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 Mittre got a free pardon from the King. 

• Nand Kumar committed offence of forgery nearly five years ago, ie much before the establishment of the Supreme Court Nand Kumar was sentenced to death under the English Statute of 1729 on the charge of forgery but the Act was not applicable to India became English law was introduced in India in 1126 and out se 1753 Neither und Hindu Law nor under Mohammadan Law forgers was regarded a capital crime view of the peculiar feature of the trial as stated above, and the events which took place before the trial, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Raja Nand Kumar’s case became very controversial The trial and execution of Raj 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 the return to England, Impey and Wan Hastings were impeached by the House of Commons and the executions of Raja Nand Kum wan an important charge levelled against them.

7. In the Opinion of Macaulay, Mill, Beveridge, Stephen, etc. Many English historians expressed the view that Nand Kumar was tried and executed by Impey at the instance of Warren Hastings and they considered it as miscarriage of justice and judicial murder.

Kamaluddin Case (1775)

Facts and Decisions:

• This case represents the first open difference of opinion between the coun and the government over the question of the Court’s control of Diwani functions
• Background kamaluddin was an extensible holder of a salt farm at Hijili, on behalf of kantababu who was the real farmer In 1775 Kamaluddin was committed on the ground of arms of revenue de from him the claim of which he disputed.
• On this basis revenue council at Calcutta issued a writ for kamaluddin’s committal without bail 
• Kamaluddin obtained habeas corpus from the Supreme Court, which set him free.
• The judges further stated that kamaluddin should not be imprisoned again until his under renter had been called upon to pay the arrears and had proved to insolvent

CONFLICTS

1. The members of the council stated that the supreme court cannot deal with the cases of revenue at was being highlighted in the regulating act of 1773
2. 2 The council therefore ordered the provincial council to re-arrest kamaluddin and pay no attention to the Supreme Court order. But the governor general warren hating refused to support the council members.

Conclusion: The case of kamaluddin was an eye opener disclosing defective provisions of the regulating act due to which not only the supreme court and the supreme council came into the dispute but also the gulf between the governor general warren hastings and three members of the council who constituted the majority, gradually became wider and wider.

Patna Case (1777-79)

The Patna case exposed the judicial administration of the company. This case is an illustration of various defects and weaknesses in the Adalat system of Bengal, Bihar & Orissa.

Facts of the Case: One Shahbar Beg who was a resident of Kabul came to India and was appointed as a soldier He married in India and settled at Patna. He had no issue. He died in 1776 leaving behind his widow Before his death he had called his nephew Bahadur Beg from Kabul. After the death of Shahbaz, Beg disputes arose as to his property and other e effects The widow claimed the entire property on the basis of a gift deed alleged to have been made by the deceased The nephew Bahadur Beg claimed the property on the basis of adoption On the basis of this alleged adoption, he had filed apetition in the provincial Court of Appeal (Provincial Council) at Patna He requested the Council to protect the property from further loss or embezzlement The provincial council issued the necessary actions to Kazi and Muftis to reach the place and make a list of the entire property of the deceased. They were further instructed to guard the property ull the disposal of the respective claims and to a report on the whole matter. The Kazis and Muftis prepared a list of the entire property, and wrote that the will and gift deed were forged. The report stated that Mohemmedan Las did not recognize adoption, and therefore the nephew was not entitled to anything. The widow was entitled to one fourth of the property, and the Test three fourths sled go to the brother of the deassed Since Bahadur Beg was the legal heir of his father, the share should be given to him The Patna council accepted the recommendations and ordered the division of the property accordingly

The widow asserted her claim to the enter property. She complained to the council but of no avail. Then they brought the mates before the SC at Calcutta She brought charges of assaults and imprisonment again the Kari and Mathies She also charged them of breaking into her house and removing certain valuables acting to 6 lakh

 The SC issued warrant of arrest against all the defendants All of them were arrested and brought to Calcutta. The SC held that since Shahbar Beg and Bahadur Beg paid revenue to the company they came under its jurisdiction. The Court held that Kazi and Mufties did not know of understand the principles of law. The SC also passed certain strictures on the Provincial Council which had shifted its responsibility of doing justice to the natives instead of taking decisions itself.

The SC awarded damages to the widow The Kazis and Mufties were unable to pay the amount so they were lodged in lad

Cossijurah Case (1779-80)

The Supreme Council (Governor in Council) clashed with the Supreme Court once again in 1779 on the issue of Jurisdiction over the zamindars who were engaged in revenue collection for the Company and whether a writ could be issued by the SC again them.

Facts: One Zamindar, the Raja of Cossijurah in district Midnapore in Ossa, was heavily indebted to Kashinath Baboo When Kashinath requested for the return of his money, the Zamindar showed reluctance by making one excuse or the other. Then Kashinath Baboo approached the Revenue Board at Calcutta, where also his efforts brought no result Kashinath filed a debt sunt against the Raja in the SC on Aug.11. 1779 In his affidavit, be stated that the Raja was in the service of the Company having been employed in the collection of the revenues The affidavit also stated that the Raja was subject to the jurisdiction of the SC The SC thereupon is and a writ of capias for the arrest of Raja of Cossijurah The defendant (Raja) absconded hence the writ was returned unexcuted. In the meantime the matter was referred to the Advocate general for his advice on the point whether the zamindar was amenable to the jurisdiction of the SC The Advocate General advised that the SC had no jurisdiction over the zamindar. Thereupon the Governor-General-in-council issued instructions so all the farmers and landholders that they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and that they could ignore the process (notice) of the court

The SC issued another notice to the Raja who did not pay the attention in view of the above instructions Thereupon the SC sued another writ for the confiscation of the property of the Raja. The court sent the sheriff along with some armed constables. The council also dispatched a much larger force to protect the Raja (Zamindar). The sheriff and constable caught hold of the zamindar(Raja) physically and assaulted him. The Governor’s any reached the spot under the order of the Governor General in Council. The commander of the army arrested the sheriff and his men and took them to Calcutta, where they were released. Thereafter SC used a writ of arrest of the commander This writ was also prevented by a similar show of armed force When all efforts to recover his money failed. Kashinath decided to file a suit apart the members of the council. Accordingly he brought an action against the Governor General and the other members of the council in the S.C.

The Governor G and councilors appeared in the court in the finest instance. Soon they discovered that the plaintiff had brought an action against them in their official capacity. Then they decided not to appear before the court The show down between the SC and the Governor General in-Council brought out the inherent weakness and defects in the Regulating Act, which did not specify the areas and the persons that were under the jurisdiction of the SC The language of the Act was vague. These defects were removed to a great extent by the passing of the Act of Settlement in 1781

Act of Settlement 1781

The Act was intended to remove some of the most obvious defects in the working of the SC at Calcutta. The following were its provisions

1. The GG. and the members of his council were made completely immune from the jurisdiction of the SC
2.  Revenue matters were taken out of the jurisdiction of the S.C 
3.  No person was subject to the jurisdiction of the SC by being a landowner, or engaged in the collection of revenue
4.  No person employed by the Governor General or the members of his council or by any servant of the Company was under the jurisdiction of the SC except where he submitted in writing to its jurisdiction
5. The Act also made provision for the release of the various officers of the company jailed by the orders of the S.C
6. The Act further provided that no action was to be entertained by the SC against the judicial officers of the company
7. The personal laws of the natives should be applied Where the dispute arose between native’s  of two different communities then the law of the defendant would be applied 
8. It was made clear that Adalat  were not liable to the jurisdiction of the SC for any act done in their judicial capacity. If there were charges of corruption, after 3 months SC could precede against them 
9. The Sadar Diwani Adalat was declared a Court of Record in Diwani cases and to be a court of final jurisdiction in civil matters of the value of 5,000-beyond which appeals could be taken direct to the Privy Council. Thus, the Diwani Adalat was not in any way subordinate to the S.C.

The Act of settlement of 1781 clarified a lot of ambiguities in the Regulating Act of 1773 and also settled the jurisdictional issue which had become a cause of conflict between SC and the GG-in-council which had also created a lot of apprehension in the minds of the judicial officers of the natives courts as the Adalat 

General: The practical results of the Regulating Act were far from satisfactory and a few years of working of the Act drew the attention of the British Parliament to its grave defects. The establishment of the Supreme Court under the Act had created certain difficulties which became very clear in the conflict between the Supreme Court and Government It appeared to the officers of the Government that the Supreme Court sought to control the administrative machinery and interfere with the collection of revenue Indians too, did not bear a good opinion about its administration of justice, although it is true the Court attempted to protect them from the tyrannies of the Europeans. The Cossijurah case depicted the conflict between the Council and the Court Had the policy behind the Regulating Act been to control the administration by judicial process, it completely failed in that object. The reason for this failure obviously was resistance offered by the Government to the Court and to a certain extent the intemperance of the judges which contributed to a great extent to the unpopularity of the Court Taking into account all these facts the House of Commons resolved to appoint a Committee known as Touchet Committee to investigate Indian affairs. The Committee submitted its report as a result of which the Act of settlement1781.

Points to remember

• the Crown by the Charter of 1726 provided for the establishment of Corporations and setting up of Mayor’s court at three Presidencies of Bombay, Madras and Calcutta.
• Main provision of charter of 1726 are: establishment of corporation at Bombay and Calcutta, mayor court at presidency town, crime n punishment
•  The conflicts and clashes between Mayor’s court and the Governor-in-council created much confusion in the Presidencies in India. The company requested the British King to issue fresh charter to introduce suitable amendments in the earlier Charter of 1726.

• The main features of the Charter of 1753 were as Revival of Mayor’s Court with Modifications ,Natives were to be governed by their own Laws ,Change in Oath System etc.
• Establishment of Supreme Court Under The Crown’s Charter of 1774:
• British Parliament appointed 2 parliamentary committees in 1772 to initiate immediate steps to end the company’s maladministration The Government of Lord North appointed Select Committee and a secret committee to enquire into the affairs of the East India Company The Select Committee submitted its final report on May 13, 1773 on the basis of which a hill was introduced on May 18, 1773 by Lond North to regulate the Government of the East India.
• The main objects of the Regulating Act were to reform the constitution of the company at home, so reform the company’s Government in India and to provide remedies against illegalities and oppressions committed by the servants of the company in India To achieve this end the Act permitted the company to retain its Indian possessions but its management was brought under control of the crown and parliament.
• The trial of Raja Nand Kumar was the first decisive event during the early stage of the growing bitterness between the Supreme Court and the Council.