Christ (deemed to be university ) Delhi-NCR campus

Judicial Plan of 1793

Submitted to - Ms. Shradha Sanjeev Submitted by - Riya Kumar (19213225)

September 18 , 2019

Contents

1 of 13
 1. Introduction
2. Chapter 1
Separation of executive and judiciary………………………………………………………1

Executive subjected to judicial control……………………………………………………..2

British Subjects and the company’s Adalats………………………………………………..3

Establishment of Provincial Court of Appeal………………………………………………4

Suits against Government…………………………………………………………………..5

2. Chapter 2

Effect of Judicial Policies ……………………………………………………………………6

The Court Structure…………………………………………………………………………..7

References…………………………………………………………………………………….8

Chapter 1
Judicial Plan of 1798

2 of 13
The judicial plan of 1793 was passed on 1st May , 1793 and the regulations framed between
1772 and 1793 were acted in accordance with the ‘Cornwallis Code’1 .

Lord Cornwallis succeeded Warren Hastings as the Governor General of India . Likewise , he
put forward certain conditions before the Crown in order to accept the post of the same. Firstly
, the office of Governor General and Commander-In-Chief would integrate as Governor-
General . Moreover , the Governor General-In-Council would have veto over the the council
on all decisions made concerning administration and military . The aim of the governor was to
uproot corruption from the present judiciary and administration system as well as tackle the
problem of land revenue .

It introduced vital reforms in the administration of justice and was marginally based on the
separation of revenue from civil justice .The notable advancements enabled the reconstruction
of the legal framework which thereby introduced a considerable amount of responsibility into
the substructure .The collector was deprived of judicial power not only in civil but even in
revenue cases consequently the executive officers didn't perform or execute any judicial power
i.e. Sadar Adalats as it couldn't be distracted by public occupation. By the change of system ,
the oppression and despotism committed by executive officers towards Indians would be
prevented .The stipulated arrangement would make the court as protectors of rights and
property of individuals against encroachment by government officers who might be tempted to
use their power for their own gain .

This arrangement involved a total rebuilding of the legal framework. Likewise it denoted an
extraordinary decrease in the quantity of courts

Separation of executive and judiciary

1
7Th edition MP Jain , Indian Legal and Constitutional History page. 147

3 of 13
The reasons aforementioned , Cornwallis came to regard the union of executive and judicial
functions under the scheme of 1787 as damaging . The policy of separating the two functions
was put into practice by Regulation II of 1793, which abolished the ‘mal adalats' and transferred
the suits triable there to the Mofussil Diwani Adalats. Henceforth the collector was to be
responsible only for the collection of revenue. The power of administering civil justice was
taken away from the collectors and was then given to the Diwani Adalats. Thus the collectors
were deprived of judicial powers not only to decide civil cases but also to decide revenue cases.
Revenue cases became triable like ordinary civil causes in regular Adalats. The revenue cases
were now transferred to the adalats and the collectors became merely administrative officers
as they didn't have anything to do with the collection of revenue.

Executive subjected to judicial control

According to section X of Regulation III made the collectors and all executive officials
amenable to the diwani adalats for their official acts. They were to be personally liable , and
could be required to pay damages to the injured party , for violations of the regulations. This
was indeed a remarkable step and a radical departure from the past.

The government had employed an army of officers which were used to deal with people
however these officers didn't always obey the law . There was always a danger that the
regulations would be infringed by the officers for their personal benefit. If an officer committed
an oppressive act , the injured party had no means of obtaining redress except for the uncertain
, dilatory method of petitioning the government at Calcutta .

British Subjects and the company’s Adalats

There was an inequitable distinction which existed between the British subjects and the natives
of India. The Diwani Adalat was empowered to take cognizance of all the cases instituted by
the British subject against the natives, but the native’s claim against British subjects were not
enforced by the Diwani Adalat. In order to remedy this defect it was provided that the diwani
Adalat would have jurisdiction over all British subject s in all disputes of civil nature not
exceeding in valur of Rs.500/-. In cases above Rs.500/- the jurisdiction over British subjects
continued to vest in the Supreme Court at Calcutta created in 1774 and the company’s court
were not given any jurisdiction over the British subjects.

4 of 13
Establishment of Provincial Court of Appeal

The plan of 1793 provided for establishment of four Provincial Courts of Appeal at Calcutta,
Patna, Dacca and Murshidabad. Each Court was to be presided over by three English Judges.
At least two judges were required to make a quorum. The Provincial Court of Appeal could
entertain original suits or complaints which a Mofussil diwani Adalat refused to receive or
proceed. It had jurisdiction to cause such adalat to hear and determine the same. It had
jurisdiction to hear appeals filed from the decision of the Mofussil Diwani Adalat without any
pecuniary limit.The Provincial Courts of Appeal were further authorized to receive the charges
of corruption against the subordinate Judges and to forward them to Sadar Diwani Adalat and
also to report the cases of negligence and misconduct by the subordinate judges. They were
also to enquire into cases referred to them by the Sadar Diwani Adalat or the government for
investigation.The decisions of the Provincial Courts of Appeal were made final in cases in
which the subject matter did not exceed one thousand rupees. From these courts a further
appeal lay to the 513Sadar Diwani Adalat in all cases involving over one thousand rupees.

Suits against Government

1. Re-association of the Mofussil Diwani Adalat-the gatherer was never again engaged
with the organization of equity. A government employee of the English East India
Company had his spot for this capacity and his activity was confined to exclusively
income accumulation. The organization of Revenue debates was given to the Mofussil
Diwani Adalat. The Mal Adalat was canceled.

2. All cases must be managed in Open Court [xv]. There could be no correspondence of
any kind between the judges and any of the gatherings engaged with the case.

3. The Approach to Justice-everyone reserved the privilege to approach the court either
by and by or through a Vakeel[xvi]. This move essentially demonstrated the
modernisation in the looking for of equity. There were an arranged arrangement of
guidelines for court methodology to be followed in court, which were pursued. All

5 of 13
 cases moving toward the Mofussil Diwani Adalat were banned by restriction following
12 years.

4. Official under the Judicial Control-No individual from the English East India Company
or individual from the official had any kind of extinguishment of risk at all. They didn't
have any such insusceptibility from being attempted under the law.

5. The differentiation among British and Indians was constrained if the case was not
exactly the measure of Rs.500 the British could be attempted in the Mofussil Diwani
Adalat.

6. Cases esteemed up to Rs. 50 were be managed by the Munsifs, who were local
proprietors or other such significant ranchers. They were not given any formal
compensation. Also, 1 Anna of each Rupee was given as Commission to them. The
Registrar's court heard cases up to the estimation of Rs. 200.

Chapter 2

Effect of Judicial Policies of the British Era on the Current Judicial System in India2

The Laws

The legal framework as we probably am aware it today, didn't startlingly show up post
freedom from the British regime.[xvii] It advanced to a great extent because of the driving
force and working of the British organisation, whose thought processes in establishing the
framework for our legitimate framework were in fact not for our very own administration,

2
7Th edition MP Jain , Indian Legal and Constitutional History page. 151

6 of 13
however for their own straightforwardness where equity and peace were concerned. One of
the essential worries for the British rulers was that there were semantic and social contrasts
in this nation that were a long ways outside their ability to grasp. Every religion had its own
unconventional route for managing a similar sort of offences, running from exceptionally
serious to merciful. Ladies and youngsters were once in a while even ensured by these ways.
There was likewise no standard per state for:

1. Proof social event/recording

2. Suitability of Evidence

3. Strategies to be pursued while meeting out equity

4. Capabilities regarding who could referee questions

5. What parameters and laws would apply while settling questions

6. What, assuming any, were the special cases to these laws and parameters

It turned out to be clear, at an early stage, that due to India's religious and social assorted
variety, the British had an extremely muddled assignment where choosing which law to apply
and to whom. They needed to make a framework that would guarantee equity, while
guaranteeing that there is no offence is caused to the traditions and religious opinions of the
gathering to the contest, or his/her locale. Master Hastings' arrangements were fruitful in
such manner as they kept up the cultural balance wanted by the British; it wound up simpler
to manage Hindu law to Hindus, and Muslim law to Muslims, and in this manner guaranteed
that India could be governed easily with no real annoyed.

7 of 13
This was insufficient to handle the deformities of our profoundly disorderly legal framework,
where equity was generally served by the King or the nearby town head or much of the time,
the religious chief. In the years 1780 and 1872, the teaching of value, great inner voice and
equity was added to the Judicial frameworks of Bombay, Madras and Punjab individually.
Afterward, through the Central Provinces Laws Act, 1875, as under Section 6, this teaching
was made the standard for mediation of debates in all areas of the British Indian realm,
whereby Judges would utilise their thinking and rationale and good heart alongside the
important individual law (Hindu or Muslim or something like that) in choosing the
dispute.[xviii] Where the cases in India were requested and would arrive at the English Courts,
for example, the Privy Council, they also were to pay regard to Indian traditions and customs
when choosing the issues.[xix]

There was no standard in the decisions passed and the idea of points of reference (gaze
decisis) was exceptionally weakened in light of the fact that each court gave its very own
choice dependent on the advices of the religious consultant, so as to look after harmony. As
a rule, the decisions were unreasonable and some were even obviously subjective, being
made by the impulses of the guide. This is the reason the British wanted to make some
standard. They did as such by classifying existing practices and traditions into one report and
afterward officially establishing it as a law.

These records were set up by a scholarly Law Commission, which was first made under the
Charter Act of 1833. The principal Law Commission was properly made in 1835, with its
control under the Governor-General of India.[xx] Some of the commitments of the four pre-
freedom law commissions of India were:

1. First Law Commission, however generally fruitless, figured out how to start to classify
what is the Indian Penal Code today.

8 of 13
 2. Second Law Commission finished the codification of the Penal Code, and proceeded
to systematise the Civil Procedure Code, Law of Limitation, and the Criminal
Procedure Codes, as we probably am aware them today.[xxi]

3. Third Law Commission began by drafting a code for progression and legacy for Indians
who were not Hindus or Muslims. They at that point proceeded onward to change the
Criminal Procedure Code proposed by the prior commission. It at that point drafted the
Contract Law, Negotiable instruments law, Insurance Law, Evidence Law, and
Property Law that we use today.[xxii]

4. Fourth Law Commission made modifications to both the Civil Procedure and the
Criminal Procedure Codes, while additionally systematizing the law on Negotiable
Instruments and Transfer of Property and Easements Laws. They additionally drafted a
code on Trusts Law.

The Court Structure

The Court structure that we have today, notwithstanding the real laws itself are significantly
because of the endeavours of the British Government. Their thought processes in making
such a huge framework, that has kept on existing admirably after autonomy might not have
been the most honourable; it is anyway difficult to deny or limit their quality in our legitimate
framework today. What existed preceding the adjustments and solidifications by the British
hand, was a to a great extent disorderly region which gave choices that were neither
reasonable, nor could be brought to examination by means of any standard. The very
institutions of the British governing body in India are to be credited for the setting up of a
positive court structure.

The accompanying focuses abridge the careful development of the present pecking order of
courts, in the structure that they existed before Independence:[xxiii]

9 of 13
 1. The Regulating Act, 1773: In 1773, the King declared the Regulating Act, 1773, which
set the setting up of a Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The Letters Patent
Appeal was issued in 1774 and this new court was made a court of record with the
ability to hear all issues and pass requests and decisions for the equivalent. The
Supreme Courts at Madras and Bombay were set up in 1800 and 1823
respectively.[xxiv]

2. The High Courts Act, 1861: With this Act, the Supreme Courts were abrogated and in
their place, High Courts were built up at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. They had the
status of being the Highest Courts in the separate Provinces.

3. The Federal Court of India: Under the Government of India Act, 1935, the High Courts
proceeded with their reality. The main distinction was that they were made subordinate
to one principle Court – in particular the Federal Court of India. This Court mediated
and settled clashes between the High Courts of various regions and settled purposes of
law that were in uncertainty. It was additionally engaged to determine questions
between the regions itself.

Post Independence the Constitution of India, has a comparative chain of importance, with the
Supreme Court on top (supplanting the Federal Court of India) and the different state High
Courts (supplanting the Provincial High Courts), with different courts under the High Courts.

During British guideline, it tends to be said that India experienced a lot of experimentation
and exact learning. Numerous courts were made and afterward abrogated and supplanted
with new components to determine debates. The British standard in India, had some
extremely positive effects on our lawful framework, and the way wherein we direct equity:

10 of 13
 1. Standard of law alongside the significance of an autonomous legal executive were
presented through the British system. The idea of detachment of forces was articulated
and improved in India through their laws and arrangements.

2. The government type of administration, vis – a – vis the Provinces, and the Provincial
Courts with the Federal Court as the last specialist, was brought into India.

3. The organization of equity even at region level, was an idea presented by the British.
They expanded the entrance to equity, pervading its span to the littlest pieces of the
nation.

The genuine impact was felt post-autonomy through our Constitution laws. Be that as it may,
this thought of a reasonable and unprejudiced framework where the legal executive was free
from different organs of state, came to India just by means of the British. The legitimate
framework that existed when the British came to India, was in extraordinary need of change
and consequently the British gave our lawful framework the genuinely necessary change.
Through their experimentation, the Constituent Assembly had the option to perceive what
new rehearses and what old Ancient practices could be could be coupled to frame our new
legitimate framework after freedom.

It is in this way reasoned the commitments of the British are critical to such an extent that
the very presence of our legal executive and lawful framework can be credited to them. The
genuine effect of the British endeavours would thus be able to be outlined by saying that they
patched up our legitimate framework to make it more pleasant and progressively available to
all residents.

word count - 2941

11 of 13
Reference

[xv] In full view of the public to increase accountability and reduce malpractices in serving
justice to the people.

[xvi] A person with full legal knowledge equivalent to a lawyer in present day terms.

[xvii] S.D. Sharma, Administration of Justice in Ancient India, New Delhi: Harman Publishing
House, 1988, p.170.

[xviii] See link: http://realityviews.blogspot.in/2010/12/part-34-indian-legal-history-charter-

of.html.

[xix] See the cases of Khwaja Muhammad khan vs Husaini Begum, (1910) 12 BOMLR 638
and Srinath Roy vs Dinabandhu Sen, (1914) 16 BOMLR 901.

[xx] As stipulated in the Charter Act of 1833.

12 of 13
[xxi] Eugen Lang, Maurice. Codification In The British Empire And America. Lawbook
Exchange. pp. 78–92. ISBN 978-1-58477-620-8.

[xxii] Char, S. V., Desika (1983). Readings in the constitutional history of India, 1757-1947.
Delhi: Oxford. ISBN 0-19-561264-7.

[xxiii] Supreme Court Summary of the Evolution of the Judiciary,

http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/supct/scm/m2.pdf (visited on October 1, 2014).

[xxiv] Id. at 23.

[xxv] Dyanesh Kumar, Essay on the Impact of British Rule on Indian Administration, (Sep, 27,
2011), http://www.preservearticles.com/2011092714107/essay-on-the-impact-of-british-rule-
on-indian-administration.html.

13 of 13