The Regulating Act, 1773

The Regulating Act, 1773 also known as the East India Company Act, 1772,
was an Act of the British Parliament introduced to establish a central
administrative system in India to improve the governance of the East India
Company’s rule in India. It was the stepping stone toward parliamentary
control over the company. The British Government recognized the
company’s political and administrative functions for the first time through
this Act. Under this Act, the British East India Company had to carry out its
administrative functions under the supervision of the British Parliament
and submit its report regarding the revenue, civil, and military functions to
the court of directors.

Objectives of the Regulating Act

 To completely abolish the dual form of administration in India.
 To look over the matters that were concerned about the proper
management of the company in India.
 To redress the grievances caused by the dual form of the government.
 To establish the Supreme Court in Calcutta.
 To introduce the governor-general officials in all the British territories in
India.
 The court of directors situated in England would have a full grip on the
functioning of the East India Company in India.
 The company would serve the British Crown with utmost dignity and
honesty.

Importance of Regulating Act

 The Regulating Act of 1773 formed a supreme body for both the
administration and judicial wings in India. The Supreme Court at
Calcutta was the main hub established to manage judicial functions
efficiently. The establishment of the Supreme Court at Calcutta resulted
in proper management of judicial functions.
 It also led to the establishment of an office for the governor-general at
Fort Williams, Calcutta, who acted as the prime authority for managing
the orders of the British Crown and administered them accordingly. The
power to negotiate or declare war was in the hands of the governor-
general of Bengal.
 It provided powers to deal with the judicial issues of the East India
Company, this system favoured a corrupt-free administration in India
where no one could accept bribes or gifts from local people.
 Faults in the Regulating Act
 The governor-general was not provided with any veto power, and his
decisions were often overruled by the members of the Council. He was
held responsible for all the administrative decisions taken in India.
 The Parliament was ineffective in analysing and keeping records of the
report sent by the governor-general.
 The Act was not much inclined towards the Indian people who paid
revenue to the East India Company.
 The powers were not strategically divided between the Supreme Court
and the governor-general which often created tension between them.

Setup of The Supreme Court in Calcutta

The Supreme Court was set up in Calcutta in accordance with the
Regulating Act of 1773, by a Charter of George III issued on March 26,
1774. It superseded the Mayor’s Court which has been functioning at
Calcutta since 1753. The main idea behind the creation of the supreme
court had been to purify the administration of justice in accordance to the
English law and procedure in the British settlement of Calcutta by creating
a court which could function independently of the company’s executive. It
was to be constituted by persons who had been professional lawyers for at
least five years and their appointment and removal vested with the Crown.
The judges of the Mayor’s Court who were known as the Mayor and the
Aldermen, on the other hand, used to be junior servants of the Company
who were without any legal training and whose tenure depended on the
pleasue of the Company’s government. Thus, the Supreme Court was
better equipped to secure a fair and impartial administration of justice than
its predecessor. Though primarily designed to administer justice to persons
of British origin residing in Bengal, it was also intended to afford protection
to the Indians against the high – handedness of the Company’s servants.
Establishment of the Supreme court is also considered as a landmark in
the history. First, Supreme Court was established in Fort Williams in
Calcutta where the city of Calcutta was regarded as the Crown’s territory
ever since the purchase of the villages of Kalikata, Sutanti and Govindpur
which formed the nucleus for the metropolis that developed subsequently.
It was purchased from the Nawab of Bengal towards the end of the
seventeenth century. Indians living in this territory were also considered as
the subjects of the Crown. Therefore, they had been amenable to the
mayor’s court and became automatically so to its successor which was the
Supreme Court. Later on, it was established in Madras and Bombay. The
Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta was created in lieu of the Mayor’s
Court, functioning there under the Charter of 1753. The act empowered the
Crown to establish the Supreme Court at Calcutta by a royal Charter. The
act specified the lines on which this Charter was to be based. The Court
was to consist of a Chief Justice and three puisne judges to be appointed
by the Crown and holding office during its pleasure. Only a Barrister of at
least five years standing could be appointed as a judge.

The court was to be called a ‘Court of Record’. The Supreme Court was to
enjoy a very wide jurisdiction. it was authorised to administer justice in civil
cases. It was authorised to administer justice in criminal cases in the
character of a ‘Court of Oyer and Terminer and Goal Delivery’ for Calcutta,
the factory of Fort Williams and the factories subordinate thereto. It was to
use grand jury as well as petty jury. The Court was further empowered to
exercise Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction which related to property
of deceased Britishers.

Jurisdiction of the Court extended to all civil matters relating to all persons,
arising within the presidency of Calcutta. Beyond the Presidency limits and
within the provinces of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, the Supreme Court had
only limited personal jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction under the Supreme Court

The types of Jurisdiction under the Supreme Court of Calcutta were:

1. Civil Jurisdiction

Where the East India Company; the Mayor and the Aldermen of Calcutta;
any british citizen who holds the property within the provinces of Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa; the Executors and administrators of the aforementioned
persons; any other person who during the time of filing a suit, or, who was
present during the time when incident occured, was directly or indirectly in
the services of the company or the Mayor, Aldermen etc, of Calcutta; any
person who has already given in writing that any matter exceeding five
hundred will be decided by the Supreme Court.

2. Equity Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court had the same jurisdiction as that of High Chancery of
Great Britain where equity eans balance and if there is no settled law then
the court would give out a balanced justice.

3. Criminal Jurisdiction

In criminaljurisdiction,the Supreme Court was to hold trials by jury. Both the

Grand and Petty Jurors were to be British subjects re sident in the Town of
Calcutta. The Regulating Act as well as the Charter responsible for the
establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court did not specify any
law for the court to administer In suits involving the Indians.
 4. Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction

It could grant probates of will to the British subjects within the territories of
Bengal, Bihar and Orissa and also letters of administration for the goods,
chattels and for other effects to the British subjects dying intestate. It was
also empowered to appoint guardians and keepers for infants and insane
persons and their estates in accordance with the rules prevalent in
England.

5. Admiralty Jurisdiction

In its capacity as a Court of Admiralty for the territories of Bengal, Bihar and
Orissa it could try cases, civil and maritime, and all crimes committed upon
vessels, ships and ferries and high seas and off- shores with the help of
petty jury consisting of British Subjects residing in Calcutta.

Further authority of the Supreme Court

As given in the provisions of the Regulating Act the Governor-General and
Council were given more leverage in the civil and military government of
the Presidency of Fort William in Bengal. They were authorised to exercise
unlimited power in regards of ordering, management and government of
the territorial acquisitions and revenues of the kingdoms of Bengal, Bihar
and Orissa. The plenary powers of the preceding President and Council
were to be vested under the Act of 1773 in the Governor-General in
Council.

The Supreme Court on the other hand was given full power and authority to
hear and determine all complaints against any of His Majesty’s subjects for
any crimes, misdemeanours or oppressions committed or to be committed,
and also to entertain, hear and determine any suits or actions whatsoever
against any of His Majesty*s subjects in Bengal, Behar and Orissa, and any
suit, action or complaint-against any person who shall at the time when
such debt or cause of action or complaint shall have arisen have been
employed by or shall have been directly or indirectly in the service of the
Company, or any of His Majesty’s subjects. The Supreme Court
consequently exercised its authority over all persons and in all causes of
action irrespective of the social or official position of the persons
concerned. The Supreme Court enjoying the jurisdiction as a common law,
equity, criminal, ecclesiastical and admiralty court was from the beginning
of its functioning fairly busy in its work.

The civil jurisdiction of the Supreme Court extended over all European and
British Subjeots resident In Bengal, Behar and Orissa, and every other
person who, either at the time of bringing the action, or at the time the
cause of action accrued, was employed or was directly or indirectly in the
service of the company or of any other British Subjects. In criminal
jurisdiction, the Supreme Court was to hold trials by jury. Both the Grand
and Petty Jurors were to be British subjects re sident in the Town of
Calcutta. The Regulating Act as well as the Charter responsible for the
establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court did not specify any
law for the court to administer In suits involving the Indians. In cases of
criminal appeal a greater amount of restrictions was imposed.

The Act of Settlement of 1781

This Amending Act of 1781 was brought up to rectify the defects caused by
the Regulating Act of 1773. A huge amount of tension was present between
the Supreme Court and the Governor-General, therefore this Act was
passed to reduce the power of the Supreme Court and enhance the power of
the Governor-General and his council members again. The servants and
staff who worked under the company and fell under the Supreme Court’s
jurisdiction now were exempted from its jurisdiction. Now, the court’s
jurisdiction became limited to Calcutta. After the implementation of this
Act, the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction on the matters of revenue, the
government became independent of the control of the Court in the matter
of revenue. The Governor-General and his council members gained power
over judicial matters as appeals were now made to them instead of
provincial courts. This Act strengthened the position of the Council so that
they could easily govern according to their convenience and exercise control
over India.

The main positive change brought by this Act was to protect the customs
and traditions of the local people. The Act stated that all the matters arising
among the people regarding land disputes, succession of property to the
next heir, and all sorts of contracts and dealings between any parties will be
decided as per their personal law. If there is a case between a Hindu and a
Muslim then the case would be decided by following the law of the
defendant.

The Supreme Court was given the authority to make rules and regulations
according to the prevailing conditions and demands of the people, who
would deal with their matters according to this law. Therefore, the laws
were set according to their way of living. The laws formed were put in front
of the British crown, who could accept, reject, or correct them.

Related Cases
Trial of Nand Kumar –
The case of Nand Kumar stands in a class by itself. It brings out the
conflicts between Warren Hastings and the majority in the council, on the
hand , and between the courts and the majority, on the other, Nand Kumar
was the proteye of the majority in the council and his trial before the
supreme court thus become in a way a trial of strength between the court
and the majority.
The case illustrates forcefully the anomalous charter of the first impact of
the English law on the Indians and depicts what kind od difficulties arise.
When a foreign system of law is transplanted suddenly in a society and is
enforced with all its rigours.
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 were
dramatically brought out in the Nand Kumar Case.
Raja Nand Kumar, an influential man in Bengal, encouraged by the council
majority brought some charges of corruption and bribery against Warren
Hastings before the council Warren Hastings was very much annoyed at
this, he even left the council meeting when these charges were being
heard. A few days later, Mohan Pershad filed certain charges of forgery
against Nand Kumar was tried by court with the help of a jury was found
guilty of having forget certain documents and was sentenced to death.
Nand Kumar trial has also been looked upon with suspicion. Nand Kumar
was a victim of Hastings. Impey was a good friend of Warren Hastings.
Warren hasting conspired with Impey to put Nand Kumar out of Hasting’s
way. Nand Kumar out of Hastings way, Nand Kumar trial formed one of the
charges in Impey’s impeachment.
The charge of the conspiracy against Impey is based only in
circumstances and the sequence of events. It has been said in favour
of Impey that he was not alone in convicting Nand Kumar. He was tried by
the whole court consisting of four judges with the help of a jury of 12
Englishmen.
The court did not perhaps be a stronger case deserving excising of the
court’s power. The act of 1728 under which Nand Kumar was convicted
had never been formally promulgated in Calcutta and the people could not
be expected to know anything about it. The Hindu or Muslim law never
regarded forgery as a capital offence.
The judges wanted to prove that the court was independent and could not
be influenced or dictated by a hostile executive. The trial and executive of
Nand Kumar administered a rude shock to the Indians.
The court held that the statue of 1728 was applicable to the Presidency
town. Now whether and English state was applicable or not to a place
depended on two factors- whether or not suitable to the conditions
prevailing there; and the date when the English law was introduced there.

The defence in Nand Kumar’s case never challenged this view. The court
held that the statue of 1728 was operative and according sentenced Nand
Kumar to death for forgery. The charter of 1753 and even the supreme
court charter of in 1774 had re-introduced English law into Calcutta. Quite a
good amount of this law was repugnant to the customs and morals of the
Indian people.

Kamal-ud-din Case

A farmer was committed to prison by the Revenue Authority at Calcutta for

non-payment of revenue arrears. But, he was released by the Supreme
Court, The Govt., (Supreme Council) criticised this and declared that the
court had no powers to deal with revenue cases. Hence, the Govt,, was
asserting its power. In a letter to the Court of Directors, Chief Justice,
Impey stated that’ when arrests were • made for non payment of revenues,
bail “was usually granted and so the Supreme Court had a right to give the
‘directives to release on bail. The Court was protecting the subject from
oppression, It was compelling the officers to follow- the established
customs and usages in revenue collections.

The Patna 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. the weaknesses of the organization of the incomparable court
and the preeminent committee which became known through the Patna
Case were, anyway , evacuated by the death of the Act of Settlement in
1781.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court is the body of the highest appeal where the last
proceedings of any matter can be taken. It gives equal opportunity to
everyone to seek justice. The Acts mentioned above paved a way for its
establishment. The Regulating Act brought central administration and
Parliament control with the Supreme Court acting as a supreme judicial
body. The Act of the Settlement also tried to curb the defects of the
Regulating Act. Both the acts were pioneers of new reform, however, both
held certain drawbacks, as well. But today, the Supreme Court stands at the
top of our judicial wing and functions diligently and also regulates the laws
for the lower to function according to the current situation prevailing.