1.

Pitt’s India Act, 1784

Pitt’s India Act (1784), named for the British prime minister William
Pitt the Younger, established the dual system of control by the British government
and the East India Company.

The Pitts India Act of 1784 somewhat amended at various times,

established the system of dual control of India by the government of Great Britain
and the British East India Company.

The first major regulation in this act was the relationship of the
company to the British government. With the Pitts India Act of 1784, East India
Company’s political functions were differentiated from its commercial activities.

Board of Control

Board of Control In political matters, the company which was till now
working as somewhat sovereign was made directly subordinate to the British
government.

To enable this, a Board of Commissioners was created, which was called

Board of Control. 6 people viz. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Secretary of
State, and four Privy Councilors, nominated by the King were the members of this
Board of Control.

The Secretary of the State was entitled as the President of the Board of
Control. This Board of control was empowered to control all matters of civil or
military government or revenues.

The board was given full access to the company’s records.

It had the powers to send Governors to India and full authority to alter them.

Result of Creation of Board of Control

The Pitts India Act 1784 actually provided for a joint government of the
company and British crownin India.

Page 1 of 31
 The Company was to be represented by the Court of Directors and the
Crown was represented by the Board of Control.

Impact on Governor General-in Council

The Governor General’s council was now reduced to 3 members, one of

whom was to be the commander-in-chief of the King’s army in India. This process
of reducing number of members from 4 to 3 was to strengthen the position of the
Governor General because now, he was able to get any resolution passed even with
the help of one member in his side.

The Governor General was given the right of casting vote, in case the
members present in a meeting of the council shall any time be equally divided in
opinion. The Governors of Presidencies of Bombay and Madras were deprived of
their independent powers and Calcutta was given greater powersin matters of war,
revenue, and diplomacy, thus Calcutta becoming in effect, the capital of Company
possessions in India.

The Governor General Council was now under indirect control of the British
Government through the Board of Control. There was also a secret committee of
the 3 directors, which had to transmit the orders of the Board to India.

This Secret Committee was to work as a link between the Board of control
and the Court of Directors.

Disclosing of Property

All civil and military officers of the East India Company were ordered to
provide the Court of Directors a full inventory of their property in India and in
Britain within two months of their joining their posts. Severe punishment was
provisioned for corrupt officials.

Thus, the act was significant for two reasons: first, the Company's territories
in India were for the first time called the British possessions in India'; and second,
the British Government was given the supreme control over Company's affairs and
its administration in India.

Page 2 of 31
1A. Government of India Act, 1858 or Queen’s Procolamation

India’s first war of Independence, which was called the “Sepoy Mutiny” by
the British, proved to be the last nail in the coffin of Company rule in India. Apart
from many social and military causes, the war or mutiny was a direct result of the
Doctrine of lapse policy of ruthless annexation by Lord Dalhousie. The mutiny
was suppressed. But it sent ripples of fear to London, and convinced the British
that administration of the India must be taken over by the Crown.

The British prime Minister, Palmerstone had introduced a Bill in 1858 in the
parliament for the transfer of Government of India to the Crown. However, before
this bill was to be passed, Palmerstone was forced to resign on another issue. Later
Lord Stanley introduced another bill which was originally titled as “An Act for the
Better Government of India” and it was passed on August 2, 1858. It is called
Government of India Act 1858.

Salient Provisions of the Act of 1858

1. Government of India Act 1858 provided that India was to be governed directly
and in the name of the crown.

2. This act abolished the company rule, abolished the Court of directors and
abolished the Board of control.

3. The act provided the Crown will govern India directly through a Secretary of
State for India, who was to exercise the powers which were being enjoyed by the
Court of Directors and Board of control.

The Secretary of State was now the political head of the India.

In 1935, the Government of India Act 1935 provided a new Burma Office, in
preparation for the establishment of Burma as a separate colony, but the same
Secretary of State headed both Departments and was styled the Secretary of State
for India and Burma.

The first secretary of state for India and Burma was Lord Dundas. The India
Office of the Secretary of State for India and Burma came to an end in 1947, when

Page 3 of 31
we got independence and now the Secretary of state of India and Burma was left to
be Secretary of Burma.

Viscount Ennismore was the first and last Secretary of Burma, as Burma got
independence in 1948.

Centralization

The right of appointment to important offices in India was vested either in

the crown or in the secretary of state of India-in-Council. This act abolished the
Dual Government introduced by the Pitt’s India act.

The administration of the country was now highly centralized. All civil,
military and executive powers vested in the Governor in council, who in turn was
responsible to Secretary of State. There was a provision of creation of an Indian
Civil Service under the control of the Secretary of State. Year 1861, marked the
passing of 3 acts. These acts were Indian Civil Services Act 1861, Indian Councils
Act 1861 and Indian High courts Act 1861.

2. Champaran (Bihar) Movement (1917-18)

The Champaran peasant movement

The Champaran peasant movement was also a part of the wider struggle for
independence. When Gandhiji returned from South Africa, he made the
experiment of non-cooperation in a smaller way by giving leadership to the peasant
struggles in Champaran (Bihar) and later on in Kheda (Gujarat). These struggles
were taken up as a reformist movement but the idea was to mobilize the peasants
for their demands.

The Champaran peasant movement was launched in 1917-18. Its objective

was to create awakening among the peasants against the European planters. These
planters resorted to illegal and inhuman methods of indigo cultivation at a cost
which by no canons of justice could be called an adequate remuneration for the
labour done by the peasants.

Page 4 of 31
Some of the important causes of Champaran peasant struggles were as under:

(1) In Champaran and as a matter of fact in the whole of Bihar, there was an
enormous personal increase in the land rent.

(2) The peasants were obliged to grow indigo and this curtailed their freedom of
cultivation.

(3) The peasants were compelled to devote the best part of their land for growing
particular crops as desired by the landlord. They were also required to give their
best time and energy to the crops decided by the landlord.

(4) The peasants were paid very poor wages. These were so meagre that it was
very difficult for them to earn their livelihood.

Gandhiji arrived in Champaran but was later ordered by the District

magistrate of Champaran W B Heycock to leave the district. Gandhi ji refused and
persisted. He decided to commit Satyagraha. He proceeded towards the
Champaran. The commissioner of Tirhut division ordered Gandhi’s arrest but
Government of India cancelled the arrest. He was left at liberty to pursue his
investigations into the peasant’s grievances. Later the Champaran Agragarian
committee was constituted and Gandhi was offered a seat in it. The psychological
impact of this Satyagraha was outstanding.

3. Codification of Law

Until the beginning of the 19 th century, there was variation of law between
the Presidency Towns and the Mofussil. Even the law in all the Presidency Towns
was not uniform.

There were wide differences between the mofussil laws of three

Presidencies. They were four Sadar Diwani Adalats and three Supreme Courts
functioning in the Country without any coordination but independently of each
other.

Page 5 of 31
 In the absence of any specific body of law the courts were trying to break a
body of law on the basis of the doctrine of justice, equity and good conscience
which were no systematic.

Law Commission and Codification of Law

An important step towards fulfilling the goal of securing a uniform and

simple system of law in India through its process of comprehensive consolidation
and modification to advise the legislative council which was newly setup under the
Charter Act of 1833.

A Law Commission was appointed in India. Accordingly the Governor-

General of India Council should issue commission to such persons as they think fit,
and the membership of the commission should be approved by the Court of
Directors of the Co.

The members were not to exceed five at one time.

Main functions of the Law Commission :

The law commissioners were required to inquire fully into the

jurisdiction, powers, and rules of the existing courts of justice and police
establishments in the British Territories, and all existing forms of judicial
procedure and into the nature and operation of all laws whether civil or criminal;
written or customary, which prevailing in those territories.

The law commissioners were to make reports of their inquiries.

First Law Commission

The first law commission was appointed by the Government of India in

1835, it consisted of Macaulay who was the Chairman Cameron, Macleod,
Anderson and Millet who was the Secretary.

The Charter Act placed the law commission wholly under the direction and
control of the Governor-General in Council which determined from time to time
the subjects upon which the commission was to institute enquires and submit
reports.

Page 6 of 31
 In the course of its functions, the commission had been given power by
Governor General in Council to examine all Government Official, call for any
papers and correspond directly with the Supreme Court. Whenever it was thought
necessary the commission could also communicate with the public.

The First Project of the Commission

The first project that was assigned to the commission by the Government
was the codification of the penal law.

Macaulay, the first law member said the Code should be drafted as to be
fully intelligible to the average, educated, intelligent person. His draft, penal code,
which had to wait long for enactment, set an example of what could be done to
achieve this.

The law commission drafted a code of civil procedure and also prepared a
draft of the law of limitation in 1842.

Another achievement of the Commission was the preparation of the draft of

the Lex Loci Act, 1840. There was no law of the place which was generally
applicable to all, except a few defined classes the Hindus and Muslims. There was
great indefiniteness as regards the law to be applied to such groups as Christians,
Anglo Indians, Parsees etc. whose numbers were increasing in the mofussil.

In the Presidency towns, English law was applicable to them.

The Commission in its Lex Loci Report proposed that the substantive law of
England should be declared to be the law of the land (Lex Loci) even outside the
Presidency towns.

The Second Law Commission

The second law commission was appointed in England in the year 1853. It
consisted of leading lawyers of England persons who had an intimate knowledge
of Indian laws, and those who were personally associated with the first law
commission.

Page 7 of 31
 The functions of the second law commission was to examine and consider
the recommendation of the first law commission for the reform of the judicial
establishments, judicial procedure and law of India.

The first report of the commission dealt with the preliminary measures
which would be necessary for the purpose of effecting the amalgamation of the
supreme and sadar courts at one presidency, i.e. at Calcutta only.

The basic recommendation of the second law commission was to consider a

single tribunal in the place of the supreme court and the sadar court.

The commission recommended the adoption of the codes of civil and

criminal procedure throughout the jurisdiction of the High Court. The codes of
civil procedure and criminal procedure were enacted by the Indian Legislature in
1859 and 1861 respectively.

In total, the second law commission advocated the idea to have a general and
uniform codified law based on the English law throughout the country to the extent
it was possible keeping in view the susceptibilities of the people; subject matters of
the civil law might not be codified, but these were not spelled out, Hindu and
Mohammedan laws were not be codified.

The second law commission came to an end by about 1855.

Third Law Commission

On 2nd December, 1861 a fresh commission was issued to certain leading

lawyers and judges of England for the purpose of preparing a body of substantive
civil law for India as directed by the second law commission.

The Commission submitted 7 reports containing drafts of the successive

secretaries of State for India.

First Report

In its first report, the commission directed its attention to the preparation of
the Law of Succession and inheritance generally applicable to all classes of
persons other than the Hindus and the Muslims.

Second Report
Page 8 of 31
 The second report of the commission contained a draft of the law of
contracts in general including sale of movable property, indemnity and guarantee
bailment, agency and partnerships.

Third Report

The third report contained a draft of the law of Negotiable Instruments.

Fourth Report

Fourth report dealt with the law of Specific Performance.

Fifth Report

Fifth report contained a draft of the Evidence Act.

Sixth Report

The sixth report contained a draft for the law of Transfer of Property.

Seventh Report

Seventh Report related to the revision of the criminal procedure which had
already been enacted into law in 1861.

It was a tremendous achievement on the part of the Third Law Commission

that it submitted the drafts of six major pieces of legislation within a very short
period of 9 years.

Fourth Law Commission

On the 11th February 1879 through a notification issued by the Governor-

General in council, 4th commission was appointed to enquire into and consider the
provisions of the draft bills on the law of trusts, Easements, Master and Servant.

The Commission made only one report, but was very exhaustive and
comprehensive and dealt with not only with several drafts referred to it, but also
commented on the project of codifications itself.

The 4th Law Commission held that the Indian system of laws, Hindu and
Muslims, should not be entirely ignored or lost sight of while carrying on the
further work of legislation.
Page 9 of 31
 The report of the 4th law commission constitutes a forceful plea for
continuing the work or codification.

The 4th law commission was the last law commission which was established
in British India.

Fifth Law Commission

On 5th August, 1955, Shri C.C. Biswas, the Law Minister announced in the
Lok Sabha the appointment of a Law Commission.

It consisted of eleven members appointed by the Government of India.

It started to submit reports from 13 th August, 1955 to 19th December, 1958

and had submitted 14 reports with this period.

The term of the members of the law commission who were appointed in
1955, expired in 1958. It was reconstituted in December in 1958, for a period of
three years.

4. Gentoo Code

The Gentoo Code is a legal code translated from Sanskrit (in which it was
known as vivadarnavasetu) into Persian by Brahmin scholars; and then from
Persian into English by Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, a British grammarian working
for the East India Company.

The translation was funded and encouraged by Warren Hastings as a method

of increasing colonial hold over the Indies.

It was printed privately by the East India Company in London in 1776 under
the title A Code of Gentoo Laws, or, Ordinations of the Pundits.

Copies were not put on sale, but the Company did distribute them.

In 1777 a pirate (and less luxurious) edition was printed; and in 1781 a
second edition appeared.

Translations into French and German were published in 1778.

Page 10 of 31
 The English merchants of the East India Company trading out of India in the
eighteenth century came into contact with several rich extant bodies of literature.
What works from India's indigenous literatures did the colonizing culture choose to
translate, and why?

Halhed, a writer in the employ of the East India Company, openly states that
he translates the Gentoo Laws in order to meld British and indigenous legal
systems in Bengal, which in turn will facilitate Britain's occupation of India for the
purposes of trade.

Nathaniel Brassey Halhed (1751–1830), the translator of A Code of Gentoo

Laws (1776) (Nathaniel Brassey Halhed, from A Code of Gentoo Laws, or
Ordinations of the Pundits -1776).

5. Jury system

A jury trial or trial by jury is a legal proceeding in which a jury either

makes a decision or makes findings of fact, which then direct the actions of a
judge.

It is distinguished from a bench trial, in which a judge or panel of judges

make all decisions.

Finding the fact of the case is with the jury while application of law to the
fact is with the Judge.

The concept of the jury system was probably imported into Britain after the
Norman Conquest, though its early functions were quite different from those today.

Early jurors in England acted as witnesses providing sources of information

on local affairs.

But they gradually came to be used as adjudicators in both civil and criminal
disputes.

Under Henry II, the jury began to take on an important function, moving
from reporting on events they knew about, to deliberating on evidence produced by
the parties involved in a dispute.
Page 11 of 31
 Gradually it became accepted that a juror should know as little as possible
about the facts of the case before the trial, and which is the position today.

The jury is considered as fundamental part of the English legal system, albeit
only a minority of the cases is tried by the jury in these days.

In a sense it plays a vital role in ensuring that the criminal justice system
works for the benefit of the public rather than for the benefit of unjust leaders.

It promotes not only a healthy criminal justice system but also a healthy
society, where political leaders can not abuse criminal justice system to silence
their opponents.

It has attained such an importance that Lord Devlin wrote in 1956:

“Trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than a wheel of
the constitution; it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives.”

Jury plays a vital role in the criminal justice system in England and Wales
and many other countries in the world.

But the constitutional position of the English jury is vulnerable because of

the unwritten constitution.

In England, because of unwritten constitution, the right to trial by jury is not

contained in the constitution.

Generally, it is governed by ordinary Act of the parliamentary, which can be

amended by the Parliament any time.

So the government of the day could alter or even abolish the right to jury
trial. However, due to the political barriers, the government is very cautious in
doing this. Juries Act 1974 is the main statute governing the present day jury.

Currently, the role of the English jury is almost entirely limited to the more
serious criminal cases, but juries occasionally sit in civil trials as well.

Abolition of Jury System in India

Jury system existed in India pre-1960, but was abolished looking at the
demerits it had.
Page 12 of 31
 Abolition of the Jury system is a positive step in the history of Indian
judiciary, since the jury can not in most cases weigh proper legal complicacies and
is likely to be swayed by popular and painted notions.

The Government of India made the decision to abolish the jury system after
the KM Nanawati Vs. The State of Maharashtra case.
It is seen that consensus of the jury are often biased. The jury consists of people
who mostly are not related to the legal system. So it's not difficult for the jury to be
influenced from popular notions/media portrayals, which could completely deter a
fair trial.

6. The Privy Council in England

The Privy Council in England

The origin of the Institution of Privy Council can be traced through

the “Federal Curia” which the Norman Kings brought with them to England on
their conquest of the country.

Federal Curia introduced a powerful central government in England controlling

executive, legislature and judicial departments.

Curia separated into two bodies namely

1. Magnum concilium and

2. Curia regis

3. Magnum concilium was a consultative body on certain occasions where as

curia regis rendered advice to the King on matters pertaining to Government
namely legislation, administration and judicial matters.

4. The Council was the Kings Privy Council and the chancellor of the Court of
Chancery assumed the function of the role of Privy Council, or rendering
advice to the King on judicial and non-judicial matters.

5. The Chancellor was also the keeper of the King’s conscience.

Page 13 of 31
 6. The king in England has always been regarded as the “fountain of Justice”.

7. The residuary power vested in him was called the “Prerogative power of the
King of England” which he invariably exercised with the help of his council
of advisers, Privy Councillors and the King was known acting as King-in-
Council ie. Privy Council.

Composition, Procedure and Jurisdiction of Privy Council

Composition of Privy Council

The Privy Council composed of the Lord Chancellor, the existing and
former Lords, President of the Council (who do not attend), Privy
Councillors who hold or have held High Judicial Office (including retired
English and Scottish Judges), the Lords of Appeal in ordinary and such
judges or former Judges of the superior courts of the Dominions and
colonies as the crown may appoint. Quorum was three members.

The Appellate Jurisdiction Act authorised the appointment by Letters Patent, of

two additional salaried members of the Committee from amongst specially
qualified persons, ie. who being a Privy Councillor has been a judge of High Court
or is a Barrister, Advocate, Vakil of not less than 14 years Practice.

Procedure for Appeal to the Privy Council

Every appeal is addressed to “Kings Most Excellent Majesty in

Council” and is sent to the Judicial Committee for their advice under a general
order passed in 1909.

Jurisdiction of the Privy Council

Appeals from India to the Privy Council

1. Early Charters and appeals to the privy council 1726-1860

Charter of 1726 and 1753

Charter of 1726 provided for appeals to the Privy Council from India.

Page 14 of 31
Charter Act of 1726 and 1753 established Mayor’s Courts at the three Presidency
Towns Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. The Mayor’s Court’s decision was finally
appealed to the Privy Council.

Indian High Courts Act, 1861 and appeals to the Privy Council

The Indian High courts Act 1861 empowered the crown on establish High
Courts by Charters. The Charters establishing the High Courts provided for the
circumstances under which an appeal will lie from the High Courts to the Privy
Council.

Appeals will lie only in civil cases not less than Rs.10,000. An appeal was also
followed from any other judgment of the High Court when the court certified the
case to be a fit case for appeal to the Privy Council.

The Government of India Act, 1935

Federal Court was established in this Act of 1935. Section 208 of the
Act of 1935 made provision for an appeal to the Privy Council from the Federal
Court.

Abolition of the Privy Council Jurisdiction Act, 1949

This Act was passed by the constituent Assembly on 24 th September

1949. For this purpose, pending cases in the Privy Council were transferred to the
Federal Court of India.

7. The Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement, also known as the August Movement was a Civil
Disobedience Movement launched by Gandhi for Satyagraha (independence).

The movement was accompanied by a mass protest on non-violent lines, in

which Gandhi called for “an orderly British withdrawal from India.”

On 8th August 1942, Mahatma Gandhi launched the Quit India Movement
for freedom from British rule in Mumbai (then Bombay).

Page 15 of 31
 In an effort to bring the British to the negotiating table, Gandhi launched his
'Quit India' movement in August 1942, and issued from a large meeting ground in
Bombay, the famous call to 'do or die'.

Indians were to wage one last struggle to achieve independence, or die in

that attempt.

The 'Quit India' movement was followed, nonetheless, by large-scale

violence directed at railway stations, telegraph offices, government buildings, and
other emblems and institutions of colonial rule.

8. Poona Pact

Poona Pact, (Sept. 24, 1932), agreement between Hindu leaders in India
granting new rights to depressed classes.

It is also said that the Poona Pact was the agreement between Mahatma
Gandhi and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar reached on 25 September 1932.

The major points in this pact were as follows:

148 seats were to be allotted to the depressed classes in the provincial

legislatures.

The pact, signed at Poona (now Pune, Maharashtra), resulted from the
communal award of Aug. 4, 1932, made by the British government on the failure
of the Indian parties to agree, which allotted seats in the various legislatures of
India to the different communities.

Mahatma Gandhi objected to the provision of separate electorates for

deprressed Classes, which in his view separated them from the whole Hindu
community.

Though in prison, Gandhi announced a fast unto death, which he began on

September 18.

Page 16 of 31
 Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar who felt that the depressed classes’ special
interests might be advanced by the government’s system, resisted concessions until
Gandhi was near death.

He and the Hindu leaders then agreed to the pact, which withdrew separate
electorates but gave increased representation to the depressed classes for a 10-year
period.

9. C.R. Plan

Looking back to 1942, when the Congress rejected the "Cripps Plan",
Rajagopalachari popularly known as Rajaji came up with his "CR-Plan". CR was
the most brilliant, serious, rational and clever-thinking man

Rajaji advised the Congress to accept the formation of Pakistan but it was
violently opposed by the Congress party.

The CR-Plan anticipated in acute detail what actually happened later in

1947.

Rajagopalachari largely engineered the Gandhi-Jinnah Talks of 1944.

It gave Jinnah much publicity, much propaganda of his cause, much force
and increased the chances of formation of Pakistan.

[Link] Ram Mohan Roy

Born: August 14, 1774

Died: September 27, 1833

Though his father Ramakanto was very orthodox but he wanted his
son to have higher education and after the basic formal education in Sanskrit and
Bengali in the village school, Ram Mohan was sent to Patna to study Persian and
Arabic in a madrasa. After that he went to Benares (Kashi) for learning the

Page 17 of 31
intricacies of Sanskrit and Hindu scripture, including the Vedas and Upanishads.
He learnt English language at the age of 22 years.

Father of Renaissance

Ram Mohan viewed education as a medium to implement the social reforms.

So, in 1815, Ram Mohan came to Calcutta and the very next year, started an
English College by putting his own savings.

He was well aware that the students should learn the English language and
scientific subjects and that's why he criticized the government's policy of
opening only Sanskrit schools.

According to him, Indians would lag behind if they do not get to study
modern subjects like Mathematics, Geography and Latin.

Government accepted this idea of Ram Mohan and also implemented it but
not before his death. Ram Mohan was also the first to give importance to the
development of the mother tongue.

His 'Gaudiya Byakaran' in Bengali is the best of his prose works.

Rabindranath Tagore and Bankimchandra also followed the footsteps of
Ram Mohan Roy.

Freedom of Press

Ram Mohan Roy was a staunch supporter of free speech and expression and
fought for the rights of vernacular press.

He also brought out a newspaper in Persian called 'Miratul- Akhbar' (the

Mirror of News) and a Bengali weekly called 'Sambad Kaumudi' (the Moon
of Intelligence).

In those days, items of news and articles had to be approved by the

government before being published. Ram Mohan protested against this
control by arguing that newspapers should be free and that the truth should
not be suppressed simply because the government did not like it.

His Last Days

Page 18 of 31
 Raja Ram Mohan Roy, during his visit to United Kingdom as an ambassador
of Akbar- the second, died of meningitis at Stapleton in Bristol on 27 September,
1833. He went there to request the British government to increase the royalty,
received by the Mughal Emperor and to ensure that Lord Bentick's regulation of
banning the practice of Sati was not overturned. Recently, the British government
has named a street as 'Raja Rammohan Way' in the memory of Raja Ram Mohan
Roy.

[Link] Table Conference

First Round Table Conference 1930

The conference was opened officially by King George V on November 12,

1930 in London.

It was chaired by British PM Ramsay MacDonald. 16 delegates represented

the three political parties of Britain and 57 political leaders representing from
India.

This was the first ever conference arranged between the British and the
Indians as equals. While the Congress and most business leaders boycotted the
First RTC, the Muslim League, the Hindu Mahasabha, the Liberals and princes
attended it.

The main Indian representatives were as follows:

Muslim League: Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Muhammad Shafi, Aga Khan,

Muhammad Ali, Muhammad Zafrulla Khan, A.K. Fazlul Huq

Hindu Mahasabha: B. S. Moonje and M.R. Jayakar

Indian Liberal Party : Tej Bahadur Sapru, C. Y. Chintamani and Srinivasa Sastri

Sikhs: Sardar Ujjal Singh

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and

Dewans of many princely states.

The concept of All India Federation was supported.

Page 19 of 31
 Dr. Ambedkar demanded a separate electorate for the Depressed
Classes.

Most of the congress leaders were absent because they were either in Jails or
followed the decision of Congress to boycott the conference.

After the failure of the First Round Conference, many leaders mainly the
pro-British members of Indian Liberal Party such as Tej Bahadur Sapru, C. Y.
Chintamani and Srinivasa Sastri appealed Gandhi to talk with the Viceroy.

The talks between Gandhi and Irwin were arranged. Many congress leaders
were released to make a favorable environment.

The Government failed to concede the basic Indian demand of freedom.

Gandhi returned to India on December 28, 1931.

On December 29, Gandhi decided to resume the civil disobedience

movement.

The Second Round Table Conference

The Second Round Table Conference, which the Congress had agreed to
attend under the Delhi Pact, was held in London in December 1931.

Gandhi represented Indian National Congress and Sarojini Naidu

represented Indian women.

Madan Mohan Malaviya, Ghanshyam Das Birla, Muhammad Iqbal, Sir

Mirza Ismail Diwan of Mysore, S K Dutta and Sir Syed Ali Imam were other
people attended the conference.

Third Round Table Conference

Third Round Table Conference was held in London on November 17, 1932.

This was just a nominal conference, Congress refused to attend it (not

invited, in fact) and in Britain, the Labor party also refused to not to attend it.

Muslim leaders who attended the conference were Muhammad Ali, Agha
Khan, Fazlul Haq, Jinnah.

Page 20 of 31
 The outcome of the Third Round Table conference was the ” White Paper”
issued by the Government. On the basis of this paper, the Government of India Act
1935 was to be passed.

[Link]–Irwin Pact

The Gandhi–Irwin Pact was a political agreement signed by Mahatma

Gandhi and the then Viceroy of India, Lord Irwin on 5 March 1931 before the
second Round Table Conference in London.

This pact was signed between Mahatma Gandhi and the then Viceroy of
India, Lord Irwin on 5 March 1931.

Salient features of this Pact were as following:

1. The Congress would participate in the Round Table Conference.

2. The Congress would discontinue the Civil Disobedience Movement.

3. The Government would withdraw all ordinances issued to curb the Congress.

4. The Government would withdraw all prosecutions relating to offenses other

than violent one.

The Government would release all persons undergoing sentences of

imprisonment for their activities in the civil disobedience movement.

[Link] Commission

Simon Commission, group appointed in November 1927 by the British

Conservative government under Stanley Baldwin to report on the working of the
Indian constitution established by the Government of India Act of 1919.

In November, 1927 the British government appointed the Simon

Commission.

The commission consisted of seven members—four Conservatives, two

Labourites, and one Liberal—under the joint chairmanship of the distinguished
Liberal lawyer, Sir John Simon, and Clement Attlee, the future prime minister.

Page 21 of 31
 The Commission was named Simon Commission, following the name of the
chairperson of the Commission Sir John Simon.

It consisted of Englishmen without a single Indian representative.

The commission was boycotted by the Indian National Congress and most
other Indian political parties for the reason of exclusion of Indians as Members.

The commission arrived in India in February 1928

The report of Simon Commission proposed provincial autonomy in India but

rejected parliamentary responsibility at the centre.

It accepted the idea of federalism and sought to retain direct contact between
the British crown and the Indian states.

[Link] Nand Kumar Case

Raja Nand Kumar, a Hindu Brahmin was a big Zamindar and a very
influential person of Bengal. He was loyal to the English company ever since the
days of Clive and was popularly known as “black colonel” by the company.

Nandkumar was an Indian tax official, most familiar for his connection with
Warren Hastings, the first Governor-General of Bengal. He was nominated as the
collector of Burdwan in 1764 in place of Hastings, which resulted in a historical-
standing enmity.

Thus was initiated the case of Nandkumar.

Three out of four members of the council were opponents of Hastings, the
Governor-General and thus the council consisted of two distinct rival groups, the
majority group being opposed to Hastings.

The majority group comprising Francis, Clavering and Monson instigated

Nand Kumar to bring certain charges of bribery and corruption against warren
Hastings before the council whereupon Nand Kumar in march, 1775 gave a latter
to Francis, one of the members of the council complaining that in 1772, Hastings

Page 22 of 31
accepted from him bribery of more than one Lakh for appointing his son Gurudas,
as Diwan.

The letter also contained an allegation against Hastings that he accepted

rupees two and a half lakh from Munni begum as bribe for appointing her as the
guardian of the minor Nawab Mubarak-ud-Daula

Within the period of 11th and 13th March 1775, Nandkumar (1705-1775)
sent several letters and other documents implicating Hastings in fraudulent
practices to the Governor-General's Council in Calcutta. A majority of the
Councillors - Sir Philip Francis (1740-1818), George Monson (1730-1776), and
John Clavering (1722-.1777), declared their intention of investigating the charges
of Hastings' presumed taking of a bribe. Their resolution and evidence was
forwarded to the Company's attorney in London.

Francis placed his letter before the council in his meeting and other
supporter, monsoon moved a motion that Nand Kumar should be summoned to
appear before the Council.

Warren Hastings who was presiding the meeting in the capacity of

Governor-General, opposed Monson’s motion on the ground that he shall not sit in
the meeting to hear accusation s against himself nor shall he acknowledge the
members of his council to be his judges.

Mr. Barwell, the alone supporter member of Hastings, put forth a suggestion
that Nand Kumar should file his complaint in the supreme court because it was the
court and not the council ,which was competent to hear the case. But Monson’s
motion was supported by the majority hence Hastings dissolved the meeting.

Thereupon majority of the members objected to this action of Hastings and

elected Clavering to preside over the meeting in place of Hastings .Nand Kumar
was called before the council to prove his charges against Hastings.

The majority members of the council examined Nand Kumar briefly and
declared that the charges leveled against Hastings were proved and directed
Hastings to deposit an amount of Rs.3, 54,105 in treasury of the company, which
he had accepted as a bribe from Nand Kumar and Munni Begum.

Page 23 of 31
 Hastings genuinely believed that the council had no authority to inquire into
Nand Kumar’s charges against him. This event made Hastings a bitter enemy of
Nand Kumar and he looked for an opportunity to show him down.

Soon after, Nand Kumar was along with Fawkes and Radha Charan were
charged and arrested for conspiracy at the instance of Hastings and barwell.

In order to bring further disgrace to Raja Nand Kumar, Hastings

manipulated another case of forgery against him at the instance of one Mohan
Prasad in the conspiracy case. The Supreme Court in its decision of July 1775
fined Fawkes but reserved its judgment against Nand Kumar on the grounds of
pending fraud case. The charge against Nand Kumar in the forgery case was that
he had forged a bond in 1770.

The council protested against Nand Kumar’s charge in the Supreme Court
but the Supreme Court proceeded with the case unheeded. Finally, Nand Kumar
was tried by the jury of twelve Englishmen who returned a verdict of ‘guilty’ and
consequently, the supreme court sentenced him to death under an act of the British
parliament called the Forgery Act which was passed as early as 1728.

Serious efforts were made to save the life of Nand Kumar and an application
for granting leave to appeal to the king-in-council was moved in the Supreme
Court but the same was rejected. Another petition for recommending the case for
mercy to the British council was also turned down by the Supreme Court.

Atlast Nand Kumar was hanged on August 5, 1775 at 8 a.m. at Cooly Bazar
near Port William. In this way, Hastings succeeded in getting rid of Nand Kumar.

Chief Justice Impey in this case acted unjustly in refusing to respite to Nand
Kumar.

No rational man can doubt that he took this course in order to gratify
the Governor-General.

The trial of Nand Kumar disclosed that the institution of Supreme Court
hardly commanded any respect from the natives as it wholly unsuited to their
social conditions and customs.

Page 24 of 31
 The trial has been characterized as “judicial murder” of Raja Nand Kumar
which rudely shocked the conscience of mankind. Raja Nand Kumar’s trial was
certainly a case of miscarriage of justice.

These two questions were raised after the decision of the Supreme Court in Raja
Nand Kumar’s Case

1. Whether Nand Kumar was under the jurisdiction of the Court?

2. Whether the English Act of 1729 was extended to India?

The judgment of this case shocked not only Indians but also foreigners
residing in India. Neither under Hindu Law nor Mohommedan Law was forgery
regarded a capital crime.

The decision of the Supreme Court in the trial of Raja Nand Kumar became a
subject of great controversy and criticism for the following reasons.

a) Charge against Raja Nand Kumar was preferred shortly after he had leveled
charges against Warren Hastings.

b) Chief justice Impey was a close friend of Hastings.

c) Every judges of the Supreme Court cross-examined the defense witness due to
which the whole defense of Raja Nand Kumar collapsed. It was also not legal
according to the rules of procedure prevailing at that time.

d) 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.

e) Nand Kumar applied for mercy to His Majesty but his case was not
forwarded by the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court was empowered by the Charter of 1774 to reprieve and
suspend such capital punishment and forward the matter for mercy to His Majesty.

Earlier in 1765, a native, named Radha Charan Mittre was tried in Calcutta
for forgery and death sentence was passed.

Page 25 of 31
 A petition was sent to Governor Spencer from the native community of
Calcutta requesting “either a reversal of sentence or a respite pending an
application to the throne”. The prayer was granted and Radha Charan
got a free pardon from the King.

f) Nand kumar commited the offence of forgery nearly Five year ago, i.e., much
before the establishment of the Supreme Court.

Nand Kumar was sentenced to death under the English Statute of 1729 on a
charge of forgery but this Act was not applicable to India.

g) Under the Hindu Law or the Mohammedian Law, the offence of forgery was
not made punishable with death.

In view of the peculiar feature of the trail, as stated above, and the events which
took place before the trial, the Judgment of the Supreme Court in Raja Nand
Kumar’s case became very controversial.

The trial and execution of Raja Nand Kumar shocked not only Indians but
also foreigners residing in India. It was considered most unfortunate and unjust.

The role of chief Justice Impey became a target of great criticism. On their
return to England, Impey and Warren Hastings were impeached by the House of
Commons and the execution of Raja Nand Kumar was an important charge leveled
against them.

[Link] of Kamaluddin (1775)

Kamaluddin was an ostensible holder of a salt farm at Hijili on hehalf of

Kant Babu. KantBabu was the real farmer. In 1775 Kamaluddin was arrested and
committed to prison without bail on the ground that he defaulted payment of
arrears or revenue. It was as per the order of the Revenue Council of Calcutta
Kamaluddin was committed to prison without bail.

Kamaluddin approached the Supreme Court at Calcutta and obtained a writ

of Habeas Corpus. The Supreme Court directed to set him free on bail. The
Supreme Court granted the bail and directed that he should not be re-arrested until

Page 26 of 31
the actual amount due is ascertained. The judges further directed that Kamaluddin
should not be imprisoned again until the real farmer Kant Babu had been called
upon to pay the arrears and had proved to be insolvent.

The Members of the Supreme Court expressed their resentment against the
action of the Judges of the Supreme Court and stated that the Judges of the
Supreme Court were not empowered to take cognizance of any matter relating of
the revenue. According to them the Company was confirmed as Dewan of Bengal
by the Regulating Act and the Supreme Council had exclusive jurisdiction.

The majority of the Supreme Council, therefore, decided to order the

Provincial Council to re-imprison Kamaluddin and to pay “no attention to any
order of the Supreme Court or any of the Judges in matters which solely concern
revenue”. But Governor-General Warren Hastings refused to support the proposed
steps of the majority of the Supreme Council.

This case is of historical importance as it reflects on a vital questions

relating to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over the acts of Company’s
servants working in the capacity of Collectors of Revenue. It is clear from
subsequent developments that the Council came into serious conflict with the
Court. The cause of Kamaluddin was an eye-opener disclosing defective provisions
of the Regulating Act due to which the Supreme Court and the Supreme Council
came into conflict.

[Link] Cossijurah Case (1779-80)

Raja surendernarain Zamindar of Cossijurah was under a heavy debt to

KashinathBabu. Though Kashinat Bab tried to recover the money from the Raja
through the Board of Revenue at Calcutta his efforts proved in vain. He therefore
filed a civil suit against the Raja of Cossijurah in the Supreme Court at Calcutta.

He also file an affidavit on 13 th August, 1777 stating that the Raja being a
Zamindar, was employed in the collection of revenues and was thus within the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Page 27 of 31
 The Supreme Court issued a writ of Capias for the Raja’s arrest. Being
afraid of the arrest the Raja avoided service of writ by hiding himself.

The Collector of Midnapur, in whose district the Raja resided, informed the
Council about these developments. The Council, after seeking legal advice from its
Advocate-General, issued a notification informing all the Landholders that they
need not pay attention to the process of the Supreme Court unless they were either
servants of the Company or had accepted the Court’s jurisdiction by their own
consent.

The Raja was also specially informed by the Council and, therefore, his
people crave away the Sheriff of the Supreme Court when that official came with a
writ to arrest the Raja of Cossijurah.

The Supreme Court issued another writ of sequestration on 12 th November,

1779 to seize the property of the Raja in order to compel his appearance in the
Supreme Court. This time the Sherriff of Calcutta. With a force of sixty or seventy
armed force men,marched to Cossijurah in order to execute the writ, they
imprisoned the Raja and it is said that the Englishmen outraged the sanctity of the
family idol.

In the meantime, the Governor –General and Council directed Colonel

Ahmuty, commander of the armed forces near Midnapur to intercept and arrest the
Sheriff with his party and release the Raja from arrest. Colonel Ahmuty sent
Lieutenant Bamford with two companies of sepoysto arrest the Sheriff with his
party.

On 3rd December, 1779 Bamford, with the help of Willaim Swanston,

arrested the Sheriff and his party while they were returning and kept them in
confinement for three days. Later on, they were sent to Calcutta as prisoners.
Council released the Sheriff’s party and directed Colonel Ahmutty to resist any
further writ of the Supreme Court.

[Link] Patna Case

Page 28 of 31
 The Patna Case Happened in the years 1777, 1778, and 1779, this is very
interesting case. Shahbaz beg khan came to Patna from the Kabul and joined the
company army; he made money and settled in Patna.
As he did not have any children, he called his nephew Bahadur Beg from Kabul to
stay with him and he expressed his desire to adopt him and handover him all his
property. Before this, Shahbaz died in the year 1776.

After this the fight started between the widow of Shahbaz Beg, Nadirah
begum and nephew Bahadur Beg regarding the property of Shahbaz Beg. Bahadur
Beg filed a suit against the Begum in the Patna Provincial Council which
functioned as the Diwani court for the town under the warren Hastings plan of
1774.

As per the law English judges were helped by the Kazis and Pundits to
understand the customs and laws of community. Kazi and Pundits were not
supposed to decide the cases wholly. But English law officers were not interested
in the Indian customs as they were more busy in collection of revenue.

So English judges have allowed the local officers to hear the evidence,
decide the fact and expound the law. Patna council left the entire matter in the
hands of Muslim law officers. Begum was not given any notice regarding this
suit. Muslim law officers rejected the Begum’s claim of gift of deed which she
said her husband made.

As Muslim law does not recognize adoption, they rejected the claim of the
Bahadur Beg also.

They decided that the property of deceased’s property be divided as per the
Hanafi school of intestate succession. One fourth of the property was allotted to
the widow. Three fourth go to shahbaz beg brother, father, but as he was at Kabul
and could not look after property it was entrusted to Bahadur Beg as his son and
representative in India.

The provincial council considered the report in the presence of the vakhils of
both the parties and confirmed the same and ordered the Muslim law officers to
divide the property. Begum did not accept the one fourth share and she left the

Page 29 of 31
house and took shelter in the Muslim shrine for the 4 months. To force her to
return home a guard was posted at the shrine. She was even denied food.
The guard was withdrawn after a month.

Then Begum appealed to the Sadar diwani adalat but that time Sadar diwani
adalat was not functioning. Then Warren Hastings wrote a letter to the Patna chief
council for explanation and later Patna chief informed to the Hastings about the
matter. But nothing happened.

Then Begum filed a case in the Supreme Court against the Bahadur Beg ,
kazi and muftis for the assault, battery, false imprisonment , breaking and entering
her house and taking away her property and claimed damages amounting to Rs.6
lakh. Then Supreme Court issued the bailable arrest warrant against the Bahadur
Beg, kazis and muftis.

They were arrested in the Patna and brought before the Supreme Court at
Calcutta the reason they all failed to furnish the bail of 400,000 Rupees. And they
were kept in jail. After few days government gave bail for the kazi and muftis.

Later Supreme Court heard the case and found that Patna council and kazis
and muftis did not function as per their duties and did not function,perform their
duties as per the procedure of law. The court found the deed of gift original and
true and valid. The court awarded damages of Rs.3 lakh to the Begum for
personal injuries. As defendants failed to pay the damages they were sent to the
Jail. This case is the excellent example which shows us to Indians the power of
Courts if they are easy to approach for the common people and speedy trial.

[Link]’s Case

Conflict of Jurisdiction between theGovernor-in-Council and the Mayor’s

Court

Facts of the Case and Held :

A Hindu woman of Shimpy caste changed her religion and became Roman
Catholic. She had a son of 12 years old. After the mother had changed her
religion, he refused to go with the mother and decided to live with his Hindu

Page 30 of 31
relatives. She filed a suit against the Hindu relatives on the ground that they
unlawfully detaining her son and some of her jewels.

The Mayor’s Court ordered the relatives to hand-over her son and jewels to
the mother. Against this, the Heads of the Shimpy Caste filed a complaint before
the Governor-in-Council and the then Governor was Cowan.

The Governor-in-Council considered the matter and held that the Mayor’s
Court was not authorised to exercised its jurisdiction over “causes of religious
nature of dispute concerning caste among the natives” and a separate warning
was issued to the Mayor’s Court stating that in future the Court should not interfere
in such cases.

The Mayor’s Court strongly protested against the stand taken by the
Governor-in-Council on the ground that the matter in dispute was not at all
religious and the Court was empowered to decide such cases under the authority of
the Charter of 1726.

Page 31 of 31