1

RAJA NAND KUMAR CASE

INTRODUCTION-

The case of Nandkumar stands in a class by itself. It brings out the conflict between Warren
Hastings and the majority in the council and between the court and the majority. Nandkumar
was the protégé of the majority in the council and his trial before the Supreme Court thus
became in a way a trial of strength between the court and the majority. This case illustrates
forcefully the anomalous character of the first impact of the English law on the Indians and
depicts what kind of difficulties arise when a foreign system of law is transplanted suddenly
in a society and is enforced with all its rigours. The Supreme Court of Calcutta though
established, by the charter of 1774 by King George III, with the avowed object of protecting
the Indians against the oppressive activities of the servants of the Company, was not,
however, an unmixed blessing to those Indians who came within its purview. The Court’s
constitution, jurisdiction, powers, law- and language were all foreign and unknown to the
Indians and were completely out of harmony with their customs and traditions. All these
aspects of the matter are dramatically brought out by the Nandkumar Case. With the
insistence of judges on the independence of judiciary, inspite of interference of the Council,
began a new era in the administration of justice in India. The trial gained 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.

THE ISSUE

A few months later Nandkumar was arrested with Fawkes and Radhacharan for conspiracy at
the instance of the governor general and Barwell. The Supreme Court in this case delivered
its judgment in 1775, Fawke was fined but judgment was reserved against Nandkumar on
grounds of the forgery case. The charge of forgery against Nandkumar, which came before
the Supreme Court in May 1775 was with respect to a bond or a deed claimed as an
acknowledgement of debt from Bulaki Das the Banker, which it said was executed by him in
1765. Mohan Prasad brought a case of forgery before the Justices of Peace for the town of
Calcutta. The magistrate, in the capacity of the Justices of Peace, being satisfied with the

2
evidence of the prosecution witness, ordered the Sheriff at Calcutta to keep Nandkumar in
safe custody until he should be discharged in the due course of law. On 7th May Mohan
Prasad gave a bond to prosecute Nand Kumar in the Supreme Court. On the basis of it the
trial bagan before the Chief Justice, Elijah Impey and three other puisne judges, Robert
Chambers, John Hyde and Le Maistre alongwith a twelve member jury of which two were
Eurasians and the rest were Europeans. Durham was engaged as the counsel for Mohan
Prasad and Alexander Elliot as the interpreter of the court. Thomas Farrer was appointed as
the defence counsel for Raja Nandkumar. The trial continued for a period of eight days
without any adjournment. On 16th June 1775, Chief Justice Impey summed up the whole
case. The judges gave the unanimous verdict of “guilty” and the jury also declared their
verdict of “guilty”. Rejecting all defence pleas the Chief Justice passed the sentence of death
on Nand Kumar under an Act of British 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 so long as the council’s decision was not known. The court rejected
the petition. Efforts were also made to seek the assistance of the members of the council but
all efforts proved in vain. Raja Nandkumar was thus hanged on 5th August 1775 at the Cooly
Bazar near Fort William.

CERTAIN PECULIAR FEATURES OF THE TRIAL

• Every judge of the Supreme Court cross-examined the defence witnesses due to which the
whole defence of Raja Nandkumar collapsed. Judges took the unusual course themselves in
cross-examining the witnesses and ‘that somewhat severely’. Indian witnesses were not
conversant with the English law and procedure and this shattered the whole defence of
Nandkumar. Criticizing the attitude of the judges H.E. Busteed wrote, “ The desire of the
judges was to break down Nandkumar’s witnesses, in particular the Chief Justice’s manner
was bad throughout and that the summing up was unfavourable.”

• 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. Under its charter the court had the power to
reprieve and suspend the execution of a capital sentence and recommend the case for mercy
to His Majesty. The court did not exercise this powering favour of Nandkumar though there
could not perhaps be a strong case deserving exercise of the 5 court’s power. Denial of
permission to appeal to the King in Council to Nandkumar was in a nutshell, a blatant

3
disregard of justice, Supreme court ought to have exercised this jurisdiction in order to prove
its impartiality in the eye of law.

• Nandkumar committed the offence of forgery nearly five years ago in 1770 i.e. much before
the establishment of the supreme court. The Act of 1728 under which Nandkumar was tried
had never been formally promulgated in Calcutta and the people could not be expected to
know anything about it. He was thus tried by an ex post facto law in the prosecution was
based on the charter.

• Neither under Hindu law nor under Muslim law was forgery considered to be a capital
crime. To sentence an Indian to death under these circumstances by applying literally an
obscure English law was nothing short of miscarriage of justice. It appears that the attitude of
the court was conditioned by the hostility which the majority of the council had shown to the
court from the very beginning of Nandkumar’s trial. Keith has rightly said, “ The sentence in
any event, as a matter of plain duty, have been respited by the court, but Hastings’ private
secretary intervened to prevent such action, and the councilors did nothing.”

• It was doubtful whether Supreme Court had jurisdiction over Nandkumar, who was not a
resident of Calcutta and that too in a case initiated on the complaint of Mohan Prasad, another
native. Thus, Warren Hastings prosecuted Nandkumar through a native, Mohan Prasad.

4
 THE PATNA CASE

Facts of the case

 Shahbaz Beg Khan belonged to KABUL and came to India and joined a company
Army and then he got retired. After that he earned extensive riches and settled at
Patna and married one Nadirah Begum.
 Since, he called his nephew Bahadur beg from Kabul to live with him.He additionally
communicated his longing to adopt Bahadur Beg as his son and make him the heir of
his property and then to retire from the world. But before he could give impact to his
wish, he died in December, 1776.
 Shahbaz Beg left impressive property behind him which led to battle for property
between and the nephew. Each one of them claimed the whole property of the
expired.
v Bahadur Beg (the Nephew) filed a petition the Provincial Council at Patna, asserting
the property in the limit of being the adopted son the deceased. He also requested the
court to protect the property from being abused by the widow of the deceased. The
Nadirah Begum designates the Mohammedan Native Law officers i.e. Mufti and Kazi
to find out his claim in the property.
 The widow Nadirah Begum,then again, asserted her claim to the said property on the
basis of three documents are:
 Dower – Deed (Meharnama)
 Gift Deed (Hibanama)
 Acknowledgment (Ikrarnama)
 The Provincial Court of Patna directed the Kazi and Mufti set up a stock of the
property and gather and seal it till an official choice. These native law officers were
also to report to the Court about the separate claims of the parties after ascertaining
the facts of the case.
 In compatibility of the Provincial Council's orders, the Kazi and Mufti went house of
the deceased and gathered the property and took stock of it.
 During the investigation they abused Nadirah Begum as a result of which, she left the
house and took shelter in a "Durgah".
 The methodology followed by the law –officers in this case was most irregular. After
inquiry the case they defer their report to the Patna Council. on the basis of evidence,

5
 the Kazi reported on January 20, 1777, that widow's agent (counsel) had neglected to
deliver the dower deed in this manner, there was nothing invalidate the attestations of
Bahadur Beg that the sum of Rs.1200/- as dower was already paid by the deceased to
Nadirah Begum during his life- time. As respects the other two documents , namely,
the gift-deed and acknowledgment-deed, the law-officers recommended that they
were invalid being forged and, therefore, the property of the deceased should be
divided into four shares,out of which three should be given to Bahadur Beg as
illustrative of his dad in India and the fourth offer ought to be go Nadirah Begum in
accordance with the Mohammedan Law of succession.
 The Provincial Council of Patna acknowledged the report of the Kazi and Mufti and
requested the division of the property in like manner. in any case, aggrieved by the
decision of the Provincial Council,Nadirah Begum favored an interest to Sadar
Diwani Adalat at Calcutta which comprised Governor – General and Council be that
as it may, the interest stayed pending for quite a while with no activity.subsequently
the dowager brought an activity against Bahadur Beg, Kazi and Mufti for assault,
battery , false imprisonment and penetrate coercively into her house and other secret
injuries and allege damages to the chorus of rupees six lakhs.
Issues of The Case:
 Whether Bahadur Beg, who lived outside calcutta was exposed to the administration
of Supreme Court or not.
 whether the law officer's could be litigated or indicted for their acts done during their
legal proficiency or not.

Judgement of The Case

The court censured the way in which the Kazi and Mufti had represented determining
realities.All the procedure in the board were ex-parte with no I see being given to the begum.
no normal preliminary was held and witnesses had not been analyzed on oath. Thus, the law
officers were attempted not for what they had done in the release of their customary capacity,
however to something outside thereto the court had an undoubted ward over the organization
hirelings.
The Supreme Court granted harms of Rupees 3 Lakhs to the dowager which was very in
proportionate.

6
Analysis of The Case:

An impartial examination of the case demonstrates that gross anomalies were conferred by
the commonplace committee in giving this case.the law officer were just to elucidate the law
and choose question of certainty yet the court found that they were endowed with the whole
work of examination. They ought not have analyzed the witnesses themselves as this was
crafted by the judge of the common gathering.

The Patna case additionally uncovered the shortcomings of the organization legal
organization ,especially that of the sadar diwani adalat at calcutta in light of the fact that the
senator general and the individual from the gathering, who constituted the court barely had
whenever to take care of the legal work of choosing claims as they were for the most part
possessed with different works and avenging their shared competitions. As respects the ward
of the preeminent court over the Mohammedan local law officers, it was held that these
officers being in the administration of the organization , the court had purview over them. this
view has all the earmarks of being right. be that as it may, the preeminent courts dispute that
it additionally had ward over Bahadur ask who was an agriculturist of land income of the
organization and henceforth a worker of the organization , does not have all the earmarks of
being right. the supreme courts choice in Patna case holding that an agriculturist of land
income was to be dealt with in the administration of the organization and consequently fell
inside the ward of the court, made dread and frenzy among the local ranchers of Bengal,
Bihar, and Orissa. along these lines this case had an adverse affected the income winning of
the organization in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa

7
 THE COSSIJURAH CASE

Facts -

The conflict between the supreme court and the supreme council reached its zenith during
this case.while the supremre court ordered the sheriff to carry out its orders,the supreme
council ordered its troops to defend the implementation of its orders.The supreme court also
claimed its jurisdiction over all the native population which was strongly opposed by the
council.

Raja sundernarian was the zamindar of cossijurah and was under a heavy debt to kashinath
babu.Though the latter tried to extract the money through the board of revenue,his efforts
proved in vain.He therefore filed a case in the supreme court. The supreme court issued a writ
for the arrest of the raja.The council came to know of the developments.After seeking legal
advise from the advocate general,the council,issued a notification informing all the
landholders that they need not pay any attention to the process of the supreme court,unless
they were either the servants of the company or had accepted the court’s jurisdiction by their
own consent.

he raja was specially informed bt the council and therefore his people drove away the sheriff
of the supreme court when that official came with the writ to arrest the raja of cossijurah.

Conflicts

The supreme court issued another writ to seize the raja ‘s property in order to compel his
appearance before the supreme court. This time sheriff with a force of 60-70 men marched to
cossijurah.they imprisoned the raja .In the meantime the governor-general ordered colonel
ahmuty,to detach a sufficient force to intercept and arrest the sheriff with his party and
release the raja from arrest.this was done efficiently. Kashinath babu brought an action of for
tresspass against the governor-general and the members of the council individually.the latter
became annoyed and declared that persons in bengal,out of calcutta,need not submit to the
court and assured that the council would safeguard their interests even by the use of armed of
the armed forces.

The supreme court issued writs against all members of the council except governorgeneral
and barnell.but the army officials refused to allow the supreme court officials to serve the
8
writ to the members of the council.The judges became furious and took the action against the
attorney general of the company.he was committed to the prison and no bail was accepted
.The councillers conveyed to the judges that if they were held accountable to the to the
supreme court on the suit of an indian ,the respect for the government in the minds of the
indians would decrease and the administration would be weakened.

The councillers very strongly stick to their stand and refused to submit to the authority of the
supreme court.At this critical stage the plaintiff withdrew the case against the gg,members of
the council and the raja.

Issues

 Whether the zamindars were subjected to the jurisdiction of the supreme court.
 Who was the competant authority to decide the issue?

As far as the first question is concerned ,it is in the political interest of the company to keep
the zamindars ignorant of their rights and status.there are many instances to prove that the
zamindars and the hereditory rajas and ranis were at times were harassed by the company’s
official’s.Also the judges of the supreme court could not get an opportunity to enquire in to
the status of the zamindars.

Regarding the next question ,the judges of the supreme court held that the court was the
competant authority to determine the legal status of the zamindars and the council had no
such power.

9
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 https://www.coursehero.com
 https://www.slideshare.net
 https://www.casemine.com
 http://www.legalserviceindia.com
 https://www.scribd.com
 https://www.legalbites.in
 https://thearticle.in

10