INDEX

 DECLARATION BY CANDIDATE..............................................
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………..
 INTRODUCTION...................................................................
 AIMS AND OBJECTIVE….
…………………………………………………………………..

HYPOTHESES............................................................................
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………
 RESEARCH QUESTIONS…………………………………........................
 JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1787……………………………………………………..
 JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1790 (REORGANISATION OF CRIMINAL
JUDICATURE)……………………………………………………………………..
 JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1793………………………………………………………
 GENERAL FEATURES……………………………………………………………
 REORGANISATION OF COURTS……………………………………………
 EVALUATION OF PLAN 1793………………………………………………..
 BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………
DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I, the undersigned solemnly declare that the project report

"Judicial Reforms of Lord Cornwallis" is based on my own
work carried out during the course of our study of Law of
Contract subject under the supervision of Dr. Priya Darshini. I
assert the statements made and conclusions drawn are an
outcome of my research work. I further certify that I.The
work contained in the report is original and has been done by
me under the general supervision of my supervisor, Dr, Priya
Darshini. II. Guidelines provided by the university have been
followed in writing the report. III. Any material used has been
duly cited in the text of the report or in the references

Name- Anubhav Anand

Roll No.- 2516
Semester II,B.A.LLB.(Hons.)
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to show my gratitude towards our guide DR. PRIYA

DARSHINI, associate professor of LEGAL HISTORY, under whose
guidance I structured my project.
I owe the present accomplishment of our project to our CNLU
librarians, who helped us immensely with materials throughout the
project and without whom we couldn’t have completed it in present
way.
I would like to extend my gratitude to my friends and all those
unseen hands that helped us at every stage of our project.
Thank you,

ANUBHAV ANAND
Roll Number: 2516
B.A.L.L.L.B, 2nd Semester
CNLU, PATNA
 INTRODUCTION

Lord Cornwallis, who succeeded Warren Hastings, came to India in September

1786 and continued as Governor General up to 1793. Accepting his
appointment as Governor General, Cornwallis laid down two conditions, he will
have power to override his council and office of the Governor-General and the
Commanderin-chief will be united in one person. The conditions laid down by
Cornwallis were accepted and he became the Governor-General of India under
the authority of the Board of Control and Court of Directors. Before Lord
Cornwallis came in India during 1726 to 1775 to follow many cases namely:
Rama Kamti case, Shimpy’s case, Arab Merchants case, Pagoda Oath case, Raja
Nand Kumar case, Kamal Uddin case, The Patna case, Cossijurah case, Saroop
Chand case, Radha Charan Mitra’s case etc., which is make conflict between
Governor General and courts. After the Battle of Plassey in 1757, the East India
Company held the administrative and judicial powers under itself of Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa. The jurisdiction of Mofussil was completely under the
Company. The judicial organization provided by the Company in moffusil was
called the Adalat System whose initial milestone was laid down in Bengal with
Warren Hastings as the Governor of Bengal. With the Regulating Act passed in
1773, Warren Hastings was made the Governor General of all the British
territories in India and the reforms of 1774 and 1780 were passed. The
Company was dissatisfied with the plan of 1780 because it had separated the
revenue and judicial functions, thus proving to be costly. Accordingly, the
Directors advocated a merger of the two functions on the grounds of
simplicity, efficiency and economy. Lord Cornwallis assumed the role of
Governor-General of the Company in 1786 and continued till 1793. The
Governor-General ship of Lord Cornwallis which extended fro om 1786-1793
constitutes a very remarkable and a highly creative period in Indian legal
history. Cornwallis introduced changes in the judicial system thrice: first, in
1787 then in 1790 and finally in 1793. By the time he left India, he had
thoroughly reorganised the judicial system both civil and criminal in Bengal,
Bihar and Orissa and placed it on an entirely new basis. He introduced for the
first the principle of administration according to law. The Adalat system left by
him won praise and encomium from all quarters. It enjoyed such a high place
in the esteem of people as well as the administrators that it was adopted as
the model for the judicial system in the provinces of madras and Bombay.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

 The researcher aims to study the achievements of Lord Cornwallis.

 The main objective is to study the need for judicial reforms
 Importance of the law code introduced by Lord Cornwallis.

HYPOTHESES:
Cornwallis was effective in uprooting the evil of corruption through his many
judicial plans. Though Cornwallis was a reasonable administrator, he was
viewed as a racist since he reserved all of the senior judicial positions for
Europeans. Even though Cornwallis almost perfected the administration of civil
judicature, the problem of criminal law was still prevalent as the criminal law
was based on Muslim personal law which already had prevalent defects in it.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The researcher has chosen to do doctrinal type of research. While doing this
project he consulted various online materials, sites and book. The researcher
after reading all the materials prepared a comparative chart that helped him to
structure his project well.
 JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1787
The judicial plan of Warren Hastings of 1780 continued until the need of change arose on
the arrival of Lord Cornwallis. The company was dissatisfied with the existing system for the
reason that it had separated the revenue and judicial functions. This separation of functions
was found to be an expensive affair by the company. It also created the conflict of
jurisdiction. On 12th April, 1786 the directors of the company directed Lord Cornwallis to
vest in one person revenue, judicial and magisterial functions to promote simplicity, energy,
justice and economy. in which all the functions were vested in one department or in body.
The company wanted Indians to remain under the same oppressive system without tasting
the fruits of good administration of justice.
As an obedient servant of the company, without expressing his views, Lord Cornwallis
introduced a scheme in 1787 in accordance with the wishes of the directors of the company.
The judicial plan of 1787 was introduced in the form of two sets of regulations, one relating
to the revenue matters and the other relating to the General administration of justice of
which were promulgated on 8th and 27th June, respectively. By this scheme all revenue and
judicial functions were vested with the Collector. The functions of the Collector under this
scheme could be divided into 3 parts:

Revenue matters-
the Collector was given the work of collecting the land revenue within his district. He had to
decide all disputes relating to the collection of land revenue. The office through which he
decided the revenue matters was called Mal Adalat or revenue court1 . He had full powers
to decide all the disputes arising on this side. An appeal against the decisions of the
Collector went to the Board of Revenue at Calcutta and a second appeal lay with the
GovernorGeneral and council.

Civil matters-
for the purposes of deciding the civil disputes a court called diwani Adalat was established
in each district. The Collector was the sole judge of the Diwani Adalat and had the full
powers to decide all types of disputes relating to civil matters. Appeals from the Diwani
Adalat went to the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta in matters of the valuation of Rs 100 or
more. A second appeal lay to the King-in- Council and it was allowed in matters exceeding
5000 pounds or more.
For the assistance of the Collector in the civil work an officer with the designation of
Registrar was appointed. The collector had power to refer cases up to the value of Rs 200 to
the registrar. The registrar had the power to decide the disputes up to Rs 2000 but his
decrees were not enforceable unless countersigned by the judges of the Diwani Adalat, i.e.
the Collector.
Criminal matters-

The collector was also given some magisterial powers. As a magistrate, he had the powers
to arrest criminals, hear evidence against them, charge-sheet them if sufficient evidence
was found against them in his opinion and commit the case to the criminal court to be tried
by it. In petty matters he was given power to decide and inflict punishment. The punishment
which the collector could give was up to 15 stripes or 15 days imprisonment
He had no power to decide cases of higher punishments; he had to refer them to the
criminal court. Unlike the previous systems the British subjects could not be arrested except
by the orders of the Supreme Court but under the scheme of 1787 the collector was
authorised to arrest even the British subjects if a complaint was filed before him and was
supported by evidence sufficient to commit that person to the Supreme Court.
The plan of 1787 was in consonance with the wishes of the Directors of the Company, but it
was a retrograde step in the administration of justice. Whatever good had been done by
Warren Hastings by separating revenue and judicial functions was undone by this plan which
reunited the two functions.
 JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1790 (REORGANISATION OF CRIMINAL
JUDICATURE)

The next step of Cornwallis was his judicial plan of 1790, mainly pertained to the criminal
administration of justice which was suffering from many defects. Warren Hastings had tried to
remove some of those defects, but they continued and required a complete overhaul of
administration of criminal justice. The glaring defects before the reforms of 1790 were: Degradation
of justice: the administration of criminal justice was completely left in the hands of Muslim officers
on whom there was no proper control or supervision. The nawab, who was given the power to
control the administration of criminal justice, did not care any more about its functioning. The
persons who were appointed as judges in the criminal courts had no legal education, character and
integrity. Therefore, they could not be expected to impart justice. They were also paid very little for
their work and the working conditions were very unhealthy2 . The officers engaged in the
administration of criminal justice were paid out of the allowance given to the nawab by the
company. Consequently, their salaries were extremely meagre and insufficient to maintain either the
dignity of their office or their families. These officers therefore could not, therefore keep themselves
above temptation and corruption. These officers had no security of tenure and could be dismissed at
any time at the discretion of the nawab. All had pernicious effect on the system. Punishment: the
moufussil faujdari Adalat had vast powers and they could inflict any punishment on any person
subject to the condition that the death sentence was to be confirmed by the Sadar nizamat Adalat.
The existence of power and the absence of proper control made these courts autocratic and
tyrannical. In many cases, the punishment awarded to the accused appeared to bear no relation to
the nature of the offence. There was no measure or standard for awarding punishments. A victim of
this punishment had to remain in prison for life totally neglected and forgotten and if any one did
obtain his release it was only after by bribing the officers. In some cases, prisoners completing their
terms were to be released on giving security for good behaviour and if they could not give such
security, they had practically to remain in prison for life. Administration: the administration of justice
was very dilatory. Instances of cases are there which were not decided as long as ten years and the
accused staying in jail waited for trial. The jails were also in bad condition where the inmates lived an
inhuman life and this left a bad effect on their personality. The prompt execution of the law is the
essence of criminal justice so that people are deterred from committing crimes, but proceedings of
the criminal courts in those days were extremely tardy and dilatory. At times, difficulty of procuring
defence or prosecution witnesses could delay proceedings. But frequently delay was caused by
collision between prisoners and judges and by the negligence and venality of the Mofussil adalts.
Misapplication of law: murder was the one crime which was less frequently punished than any other
crime. One magistrate gave his opinion that not one man in five hundred who deserved death
penalty was executed. To some extent, this was due to the defect and inadequacies of Muslim
criminal law which left too much discretion to the judges in a very large number of offences. But
more often, it was the result of misapplication of the law by Adalat due to corruption and venality3 .
The Bengal revenue consultations of this period are replete with instances reported by the district
magistrates in which either inadequate punishments were awarded to hardened criminals, or unduly
severe punishments were awarded to innocent persons, or to those who were guilty of less serious
crimes. One of the worst aspects of the prevailing situation was that the dacoits and murderers were
protected and patronised by the zamindars which made it almost impossible to apprehend and try
them. Thsu major crimes were committed with impunity and lawlessness prevailing throughout
Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. In these circumstances lord Cornwallis decide to introduce reforms in the
criminal justice. He circulated a questionnaire to all the magistrates in the Mofussil area to ascertain
their views about the existing criminal justice system. The replies painted a very grim picture of the
system4 . On the basis of these replies Cornwallis came to the conclusion that the criminal
administration of justice should be radically changed and overhauled so as to make it worth its
name. With this idea in mind he promulgated the scheme of 1790 on 3rd December. The most
outstanding feature of this scheme was the elimination of the name of the nawab from the
administration of the criminal administration was given to English servants of the company who
were to be assisted by the Muslim law officers as advisers. COURTS CREATED Three types of courts
were created to administer justice in the Mofussil area. At the top was the Sadar nizamat Adalat, in
the middle the circuit court and at lowest level was the court of district magistrate. Court of district
magistrate: the district magistrate was given the same powers and functions which he had under the
plan of 1787 i.e. he arrested the criminals, took evidence against them and committed them to the
circuit court for trial. In small crimes however he could punish the criminals up to 15 rattans or 15
days imprisonment. Within his district he notified the date and time of the visit of the circuit court so
that the concerned people could come before it. He maintained all charts and records to be
examined by the circuit court about the work he had done and about the persons awaiting the trial.

Circuit courts: the entire Mofussil area was divided into 4 divisions. In each division a circuit court
was established. The circuit court consisted of two servants of the company who administered
criminal justice in all the matters presented to it by the district magistrates. The circuit court was a
moving court like the itinerant justices in England. It visited every district twice a year to try the
persons chargesheetd by the magistrate. The circuit court was assisted by a qazi and mufti for
expounding law and proposing Fatwas5 on the facts on record. The circuit court gave punishment on
the Fatwas of the Muslim law officers. If the Fatwa was not accepted or the sentence related to
death and life imprisonment, the case was referred to the Sadar nizamat Adalat by the circuit court.
To maintain the independence of the Muslim law officers they were given security of tenure and
could be removed by the Governor General and council for incapacity and misconduct. Sadar
nizamat Adalat: the Sadar nizamat Adalat which had its seat in Murshidabad was transferred to
Calcutta where the Governor General and his councils were its judges. They were assisted by Muslim
law officers i.e. a kami and a mufti. In cases which were referred to the Sadar nizamat Adalat by the
circuit court the advice of the qazi and mufti was taken as to whether the Fatwa given by the officers
of the circuit court was confirmable to the facts of the case or not. The statement of these officers
was consulted by the Sadar nizamat Adalat before it gave its final judgment. The Sadar nizamat
Adalat had the power to refer the deserving cases to the Governor-General and council for mercy6 .
Crimes by British subjects: as regards the arrest of British subjects residing in the Mofussil and
accused of committing crimes, the provisions made in 1787 for the purpose were repeated. It was
only in 1793 that he position improved somewhat in this connection. To improve control over these
people, the charter act of 1793 enacted by parliament authorised the GovernorGeneral in council to
appoint justices of the peace from amongst the company’s covenanted servants or other British
inhabitants. Their appointments were to issue under seal of the Supreme Court. These justices were
not to sit on any court of oyer and terminer unless called upon to do so. Any conviction by a justice
of the peace outside the court of oyer and terminer was removable by a writ of certiorari within 6
months into the Supreme Court. Some other important features of the system of 1790 were the
abolition of the office of the remembrancer which had been created by Warren Hastings. Secondly,
the officers of the court were increased so that they could take full interest in their work and could
not be easily bribed. The system created in 1790 worked well. The only defect which emerged in the
system was the excess of work in the circuit courts. The number of circuit courts was small for the
area and number of cases was very large. For this reason the arrears of work began to increase.
Therefore, in 1792 Cornwallis gave some more powers to the magistrates to give punishment in
cases up to 30 strips or one month’s imprisonment. Some more reforms were introduced on the
criminal side before the final plan of 1793. There was a provision for allowance to the prosecutors
and witnesses who came to the law courts. The provision for the attachment of the property of the
accused during the trial was abolished. Finally, provision was made for the payment of an amount
not exceeding 5 rupees to the convicts on their release from jail for meeting their necessary
expenses for a month. This was done for the purpose of rehabilitation of the criminal so that he may
not be compelled to commit crimes and could start a new life.

JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1793

The scheme introduced by Lord Cornwallis during the last year of his tenure has been an
outstanding achievement of his life and a great step in the development of the Indian legal system.
The scheme introduced by Lord Cornwallis in 1787 was fundamentally unsound and it proved to be
so in practice. The collector who had been vested with so many powers very soon became an
autocrat and neglected his judicial functions. Actually, his main function was the collection of land
revenue on which his future prospects, promotions and remunerations depended. Therefore he was
more concerned with the collection of land revenue and hardly cared for judicial work. Consequently
judicial work suffered and arrears increased. The diwani Adalat had 30000 cases pending for several
years. The collector being responsible for collection of land revenue could not be expected to give
impartial justice in his own case. This arrangement was against natural justice. Due to these effects it
was necessary that a new and reformed system to be devised. Therefore the scheme of 1793 made
far-reaching and fundamental changes for the first time in the legal system of the company and the
country. GENERAL FEATURES The General features of the scheme may be called as the basic
postulates of the scheme. They related to those aspects of the judicial administration which lay at
the root of proper judicial system. The following were the features introduced by this scheme7 .
Separation of executive and judiciary- the most important part of this scheme was the separation of
the judicial and executive functions which had been blended together under the scheme of 1787.
The collector who had been vested with all the judicial powers in civil, criminal and revenue matters
was divested of those powers and was left only with the power to collect land revenue. Henceforth,
he would not decide any dispute relating to land revenue, civil or criminal matters. The policy of
separating the two functions was put into practice by Regulation II of 1793 which abolished the mal
Adalat and transferred the suits triable there to the Mofussil diwani Adalat. Control of judiciary over
executive- by Regulation III, section 10 , all executive officers including the collector were made
amenable to the jurisdiction of the courts personally, i.e. a person could file a suit in the Diwani
Adalat against any officer personally, if he committed any wrong or violated any regulation made by
the Government. In this way for the first time a privilege was given to the people against the
company’s officers who committed any wrong against them. Prior to it the only remedy available to
them was to move a petition to the Governor General and council at Calcutta. It could hardly be
availed of by the people living at far off places. This indeed was a remarkable step and a radical
departure from the past. By making the officers subject to judicial control, and making them
personally liable for damages awarded against them for violating the law, the idea that officers were
above the law and could transgress law and could commit oppression with impunity was sought to
be eradicated. Cornwallis thus took a great step forward in establishing sovereignty and rule of law
and safeguarding the person and property of the people. Government liability- for the first time the
liability of the government for its wrongs and for the wrongs of its officers committed during the
course of their duties was recognised. Any person could file a suit for damages in the diwani Adalat
against the government in the same way as he could file against any private person. This provision
made the government more responsible towards the people and it carried its work in a more
responsive way. Not only this, Cornwallis even advocated the principle” where government is a party
with its subjects regarding property, it should submit its rights to be tried through the medium of its
officers in the courts of justice.8 ” British subjects made amenable to diwani Adalat- the position
uptil now was that if a British subject committed any wrong in the Mofussil area, the only remedy
available to an Indian was that he could inform the collector who could refer the matter to the
Supreme court or he could file a suit in the supreme court against the concerned British subject. The
position concerned was very hard for the native people, who could hardly reach the Supreme Court
because of their poverty and difficult means of communication. Therefore, in practice native Indians
did not have any remedy against the British subjects for the wrongs of the latter. To change this
inequitable position, the diwani Adalat was given power for not allowing any British subject to live
beyond 10 miles from Calcutta unless he executed a bond to the effect that he shall be liable to the
jurisdiction of the court in cases up to the value of Rs. 5009 . Apart from this if a British subject filed
a suit in a diwani Adalat he was subject to the jurisdiction of that court for all consequences that
would follow that suit or in an appeal against the decision of the original court. In this way a much
needed provision was introduced by the scheme though its effect and extent was limited. It was
however of a limited efficacy for claims over 500 rupees against the British subject had still to be
instituted in the Supreme Court and not in the Company’s Adalat. REORGANISATION OF COURTS The
courts, particularly the courts of civil justice were fully reorganised. The changes may be expressed
under two broad headings of civil and criminal judiciary

Civil Judiciary- a complete hierarchy of courts was established to deal with civil matters. In this
hierarchy at the top was the Sadar diwani Adalat and in the bottom were the courts of Munsif and
Ameens. The jurisdiction and constitution of these courts may be mentioned in brief. Sadar diwani
Adalat- the Sadar diwani Adalat was the highest court in the judicial hierarchy which consisted, as
usual of the Governor General and council. It heard appeals against the decisions of the provincial
courts of appeal in matters exceeding Rs 1000. An appeal against the decisions of this court could go
to the king-in-council in matters exceeding 5000 euros. The changes introduced in the powers and
functions of this court related to the supervision and control of the lower judiciary. In that capacity
the court could receive any original suit to be referred to the provincial court of appeal or to the
diwani Adalat, if either of them had neglected to entertain the matter. It also heard and decided
charges of corruption and impotency against the judges of the provincial appellate courts and the
diwani Adalat and gave proper punishments. In this way the lower courts were fully and directly
subjected to the control of the Sadar diwani Adalat. Provincial court of appeal- before the scheme of
1793 the only appellate court was the Sadar diwani Adalat with its seat at Calcutta which was hardly
accessible to the people living in the interior. The court did not have enough time to decide the
appeals which came before it and Generally, they remained pending for several years. So in practice
very few appeals were made to the Sadar diwani Adalat and that too only by those who could afford
to go to Calcutta. Indirectly it amounted to the absence of any appellate court. To avoid all these
defects and increase efficiency a court of first appeal was established in each of four divisions of
Patna, Dacca, Calcutta and Murshidabad with the name of provincial court of appeal. The provincial
court of appeal consisted of three British servants of the comapny as its judges. The provincial court
of appeals had the jurisdiction to try civil suits referred to it by the government or the Sadar diwani
Adalat; to entertain and refer back to diwani Adalat those cases which it had refused to entertain; to
hear appeals in all matters against the decisions of the diwani Adalat, if filed within three months,
and lastly, to receive charges of corruption against the judges of the diwani Adalat and send them to
the Sadar diwani Adalat with its report. In this way the court apart from being court of appeal in all
matters also had direct control over the subordinate courts, i.e. the diwani Adalat. Diwani Adalat- at
the district level the diwani Adalat was reorganised by dislodging the collector from its judgeship and
appointing a civil servant of the company in his place as its judge who had no other work except
deciding the civil and revenue disputes. The judge was required to take an oath of impartiality and
was also required to keep proper records of all the proceedings and hold the court in open so that it
could be seen by the people that justice was actually being administered. Registrar courts- the
diwani Adalat could refer the suits up to the value of Rs 200 to the court of registrar which was held
by a servant of the company. The decrees and orders of the registrar were countersigned by the
judge of the diwani Adalat before they came into effect.

This court gave an opportunity to the diwani Adalat to concentrate on more difficult and important
cases. Munsif courts- to bring justice nearer to the people and to avoid inconvenience in matters of
small value, provision was made by regulation XI for issuing commissions to zamindars, landholders,
tehsildars and other respectable persons appointing them as Munsifs to try suits up to the value of
Rs 50. Munsifs were appointe d in such a number that no person was required to travel more than
10 miles to file a suit. Suits could be filed directly in the Munsif’s courts but they could be executed
only by the diwani Adalat. The first appeal against the decision of the Munsifs went to the diwani
Adalat and then to the provincial court of appeal. The institution of Munsif’s court was undoubtedly
a great boon to the people as they being natives had better knowledge of the local customs usage
and circumstances. Ameen’s court- a court of amen, junior to Munsif was created which had almost
the same composition and powers as the court of Munsif with the exception that it could not
entertain a case directly unless referred to it by the diwani Adalat. An arbitrator could decide a suit if
both the parties executed an arbitration bond. Decisions of an arbitrator were not to be set aside by
the Adalat except for his corruption or partiality. His decision could be enforced only by the Adalat
and not by himself directly. On the whole, Munsiffs, Ameens or arbitrators were to be appointed in
such a manner that no person was required to travel beyond ten miles to answer any suit preferred
against them. Criminal judicature- the scheme of criminal judicature introduced in 1790 was left
intact in 1793 subject to only a few changes. These changes became necessary to achieve
coordination between the criminal and civil judicature. Regulation IX of 1793 practically re-enacted
the scheme of 1790 with the following modifications: 1) in 1790, collectors were to act as
magistrates. Consistent with the policy adopted in 1793 of depriving the collectors of judicial power
and keeping them merely as executive officers magisterial officers, magisterial functions were now
transferred to the judges of the Mofussil diwani Adalat. 2) The judicial powers of the magistrate
were redefined. They could punish petty offences by imprisonment up to 15 days or by a fine up to
Rs 100. 3) The courts of circuit established in 1790 and the provincial courts of appeal being
established in 1793 were merged to create 4 courts of appeal and circuit. Each such court was to
consist of three English judges. The court was to break itself into two divisions which were to go on
circuit simultaneously. Legislative methods and form of regulation- since 1772, Bengal, Bihar and
Orissa had been ruled through Regulations made by the government at Calcutta but there did not
exist any General code of these regulations. Regulations were usually drawn without any form.
Cornwallis therefore desired to effect some reforms in the legislative methods and forms with a view
to ensure that the Regulations making power was exercised in a more formal manner. Henceforth
each regulation was to have a title expressing its subject as concisely as possible. Each regulation and
clauses were to be numbered serially. Each section was to have the marginal note to show the
subject given within it. Regulations of each year were to be recorded properly, printed, published
and circulated regularly so that they could be made available to the people and the courts and
authorities to whom they were concerned. At the end of the year all regulations passed in that year
were compiled into volumes and an index was prepared for all of them. The regulations introduced
by Cornwallis were collectively called as Cornwallis code. To make the regulations accessible to the
natives they were also translated in Persian and Bengali languages10 . Position of native law officers
improved: help of native law officers was taken from the very beginning of the Adalat system under
the rule of the company to expound principles of Hindu and Mohammed and law. But reputation
and position of these officers was not good. They were Generally found indulging in corrupt
practices. To improve their lot, regulation XII of 1793 provided that the law officers shall be
appointed by the Governor-General and council from amongst the people of good character,
integrity and skilled in law. They were given security of tenure and could be dismissed only for
incapacity or misconduct in their public duty, proved to the satisfaction of the Governor General and
council. They were required to take an oath before they assumed their office11. These provisions
gave self- confidence and self-esteem to the law officers as well as reposed people’s faith in them.
These provisions had a long and salutary lasting impact on position of the Indian law officers and
judiciary of the legal system. Court fees- in his anxiety to make justice easily accessible to all,
Cornwallis took a radical step of abolishing the court fees. Before 1793, court fees on a sliding scale
between 2-5% on the cause of action had to be paid by the plaintiff. This made litigation costly for, in
addition to court fees, parties had also to incur expenses on fees of the vakeel, travel from their
homes to the Adalat etc. the payment of court fees was a hardship to the people, and even
amounted to denial of justice to those who could not pursue their claims because of their inability to
pay the court fees.

EVALUATION OF THE PLAN OF 1793: In the light of the legal developments since the establishment
of the East India Company, it is clear that the judicial system of 1793 introduced by Lord Cornwallis
was the most logical, comprehensive, well planned and foresighted. Cornwallis’ reforms of 1793
were based on two basic postulates of the British Constitutional Law, viz., and separation of the
judiciary from the executive and the subjection of the executive to judicial control. Cornwallis
believed that no system could ever effective so long as its due execution depended solely on the
personal qualifications of the individuals appointed to work it. The security of person and property
must be established by a system upheld by its own inherent principles. Cornwallis devised a scheme
of 1793 which, from all standards and tests, constituted an exquisite system to afford protection to
person and property. The subsequent changes made in the Adalat system introduced by Cornwallis
were dictated mostly by the practical need to cope with the load coming before the Adalat. These
changes followed six main lines of development. Firstly, the policy of disturbing justice free of cost
was negative within a short time thus knocking out an important tenet on which the system of 1793
was based. Secondly, there was gradual evolution of the subordinate judiciary below the district
Adalat. Thirdly, the Indians gradually secured an increasingly larger share in the function of
administration to justice. Fourthly, applying the principle of separation of powers between the
executive and the judiciary, the Sadar Adalat were separated from the executive and placed under
separate judges. Fifthly, the principle of separation was gradually negated at the lower level insofar
as the decision of revenue matters was handed over to the collectors in course of time. Sixthly,
gradually, the right of appeal from the lower to the higher courts was curtailed. Many of the defects
that existed in the earlier schemes disappeared and the courts functioned with great efficiency,
independence and judicious outlook. For the first time the “rule of law” was established in the
Mofussil area. In spite of these advantages a few defects were found in the scheme in course of
time. They were: a. The provision for two or three appeals in civil cases increased the arrears of work
in the appellate courts. The provision for appeals made with a purpose of avoiding any and every
chance of injustice made the process very slow. The over cautiousness thus proved to be a curse
instead of a blessing. b. Indians were excluded from the judiciary except at the level of Munsif. Such
distrust in Indians generated the dissatisfaction amongst them as well as made the system less
efficient and to some extent artificial because the English servants did not know or understand the
customs, usage, needs and circumstances of the people. Cornwallis laboured under the impression
that Indians were unreliable and could easily be influenced. This impression reflected his attitude for
lack of understanding of the people of this country. If Indians were paid the same remuneration as
British, they would have worked with the same, if not more, integrity and responsibility as the
British. The directors of the company realised it and had expressed as early as 1786 that “when the
talents of the more respectable native can with propriety and safety be employed in the
management of the country, we think it both just and political to carry that principal into effect. The
natives in General are most competent to the duties of detail in that climate and in fact have always
conducted that laborious part of them.” Slowly the government came to realize it and in due course
employed more and more Indians successively. c. Cornwallis did everything on structural and
procedural side but he could not do much to reform the substantive law particularly the criminal law
which ‘was based on Muslim law and suffered from a number of defects. Absence of any law on
many points left the courts to be guided by their own discretion. Had Cornwallis stayed for some
time perhaps he would have done something in this regard also. But as he had to leave in 1793, this
part of the matter was left to be attended by his successors.

CONCLUSION The Governor General ship of Lord Cornwallis which extended from 1786 to creative
constitutes a very remarkable and a highly creative period in Indian Legal History. He introduced for
the first time the principle of administration according to law. The Adalat System left behind by him
won praise and encomium from all quarters. The system introduced envisaged a division of revenue
and judicial functions and their vesting in distinct functionaries. Cornwallis introduced changes in the
judicial system thrice: first, in 1787; then in 1790 and, finally, in 1793. By the time he left India, he
had thoroughly reorganized the judicial system, both civil and criminal, in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa
and placed it on an entirely new basis. He introduced for the first time the principle of
administration according to law. The Adalat system left behind by him won praise and encomium. It
enjoyed such a high place in the esteem of the people as well as the administrators that it was
adopted as the model for the judicial systems introduced later in the Provinces of Madras and
Bombay. Cornwallis received critical assistance from others in his effort to introduce legal reforms.
William Jones, an expert on languages, translated existing Hindu and Muslim penal codes into
English so that they could be evaluated and applied by English-speaking judges. Cornwallis began in
1787 by giving limited criminal judicial powers to the company's revenue collectors, who already
also served as civil magistrates. He also required them to report regularly on detention times and
sentences given. In 1790 the company took over the administration of justice from the Nawab, and
Cornwallis introduced a system of circuit courts with a superior Judges were drawn from the
company's European employees. These reforms also included changes to the penal codes to begin
harmonizing the different codes then in use. By the time of his departure in 1793 his work on the
penal code, known in India as the Cornwallis Code, was substantially complete. One consequence of
the Cornwallis Code was that it, in effect, institutionalized racism in the legal system. Cornwallis, in a
manner not uncommon at the time, believed that well-bred gentlemen of European extraction were
superior to others, including those that were the product of mixed relationships in India. Of the
latter, he wrote "as on account of their colour & extraction they are considered in this country as
inferior to Europeans, I am of opinion that those of them who possess the best abilities could not
command that authority and respect which is necessary in the due discharge of the duty of an
officer." In 1791 he issued an order that "No person, the son of a Native Indian, shall henceforward
be appointed by this Court to Employment in the Civil, Military, or Marine Service of the Company."
Cornwallis's biographers, the Wick wires, also observe that this institutionalization of the British as
an elite class simply added another layer on top of the complex status hierarchy of caste and religion
that existed in India at the time. Cornwallis could not have formalized these policies without the
(tacit or explicit) agreement of the company's directors and employees. Cornwallis's attitude toward
the lower classes did, however, include a benevolent and somewhat paternalistic desire to improve
their condition. He introduced legislation to protect native weavers who were sometimes forced into
working at starvation wages by unscrupulous company employees, outlawed child slavery, and
established in 1791 a Sanskrit college for Hindus that is now the Government Sanskrit College in
Benares. He also established a mint in Calcutta that, in addition to benefiting the poor by providing a
reliable standard currency, was a forerunner India's modern currency.

BIBLIOGRAPHY  Cornwallis in Bengal: A. Aspinall  Lord Cornwallis: Administrative Reforms And

British Policy by Prakash  Lord Cornwallis: Daniel E. Harmon  History and Constitution of the Courts
and Legislative Authorities in India  Outlines of Indian Legal History 
https://blog.ipleaders.in/judicial-reforms-brought-lordcornwallis/ 
https://www.lawcolumn.in/judicial-reforms-by-lordcornwallis/