In 1771 the court of Directors resolved " to stand forth as Diwan" and bring the administration of revenue and justice under the immediate control of the Company's servants. The following year,Warren Hastings , who was appointed the Governor of Bengal, drew up a report for the reorganisation of judicial and revenue institutions which was immediately adopted by the Government. Under this plan, in each district moffussil Dewani Adawluts, under the supervision of European collectors of revenue, were established and a Sudder Diwani Adawlut or Civil Court of Appeal presided over by the Governor and members of the Council was instituted at Calcutta. Under the old system zamindars and farmers were responsible for maintaining peace in their estates and, in cases of robbery, they had to produce both the culprits and the property stolen. Hastings set up Criminal Courts or Fauzdari Adawluts, and transferred to these the jurisdiction formerly exercised by the zamindars. " A qazi and a mooftee, with the assistance of two maulvis, appointed to expound the law, sat to hold trials for all criminal offences. The English collectors of revenue were, however,directed to superintend the proceedings of these courts, to see that the necessary witnesses were summoned and examined; that due weight was allowed to their testimony,and that the decisions passed were fair and impartial." The judgements of the provincial criminal courts were appealable to the Sudder Nizamat Adawlut established at Murshidabad and presided over by an officer appointed by the Nawab. These provincial courts derived their authority and jurisdiction from the Mughal Government in whose name the Company acted as the Diwan and were consequently known, as the Company's Courts as distinguished from the Crown's Courts established under the English royal charters.
Friday, October 25, 2013
British period judicial system (series1)
The Charter of 1683 gave the Company full power to make peace and war, and also provided for establishing a Court of Judicature to be held at such place or places as the Company might direct. In 1726 the Crown by Letters Patent established Mayor's courts on the English pattern at Madras, Bombay and Fort William (Calcutta), each consisting of a Mayor and nine Aldermen who had the power to hear all civil suits, actions and pleas between party and party. These were declared to be courts of Record from whose decisions an appeal lay to the Governor and Council in important cases a further appeal to the Privy Council in the United Kingdom. The Governor and five seniors of the Council were required to hold quarterly sessions for the trial of all kinds of offences other than treason. In 1753 by Letters Patent, Courts of Request (the predecessors of small causes courts) were established at each of the three presidency towns for the determination of suits in which the amount involved did not exceed Rs 20. Their jurisdiction was restricted only to the Europeans in express terms suits between Indians were not to be determined by the Mayor's courts unless by the consent of the parties. This was a self-imposed limitation which showed an intention on the part of the British Crown not to claim rights to territorial sovereignty over any portion of India.
The year 1765 marked the commencement of the East India Company's territorial sovereignty. Clive succeeded in obtaining from Emperor Shah Alam the grant of the Diwani or fiscal administration of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The Nizamat or criminal jurisdiction continued to remain with the Nawab at Murshidabad while the Company was to collect the revenue, maintain the army, and be responsible for the administration of civil justice. Not being familiar with the state of country in the interior,the Company did not interfere with the management of civil institutions till 1722, except by the appointment of a few European officials, with superior authority, to superintend the revenue and judicial administration. At this time Mohamedan criminal law was in force throughout the courts. The principal criminal courts were of the Nawab and his deputy, and of the Faujdars. In the province the zamindars and farmers were responsible for public safety and exercised civil and criminal jurisdiction over their respective districts. Their authority was supreme except in capital cases which were to be reported to the Nizam.
The Administration of Justice
The main aims of the administration of justice are two-fold: the search for truth and the attempt to make people abide by the rules of law. In ancient times, according to Vinogradoff, more emphasis was laid on solving problems than on the search for truth. Justice was administered by the King and Manu and Narada have compared the position of the king to that of a surgeon. The Mahabharata says that the king who is also the one who dispenses justice should not deviate from the path of truth and he should be a cultured person with an intellectual bent of mind. The Naradiya Dharmasastra states:
Judicial procedure has been instituted for the protection of human race, as safeguard of law and order to take from kings the responsibility for crime committed in their kingdoms. When humanity was strictly virtuous and veracious, there existed no quarrels, nor selfishness. Virtue having become extinct among them, judicial procedure has been established, and the king, having privilege of inflicting punishments, has been instituted judge of lawsuits.
Role of Judiciary
In social welfare stat as envisaged by the Constitution of India the state has to discharge manifold obligations for the welfare of the people. This expansion in the role of the state has necessitated legislation in various fields which has resulted in corresponding increase in the role of the Judiciary. Today the Judiciary is not only required to resolve disputes inter se but also between the citizen and the state. In view of the changing pattern of the disputes which are required to be resolved it became necessary to have special courts and tribunals. Today we have a number of such courts and tribunals functioning in the country dealing with question relating to family disputes, taxation, accident claims, labour disputes, government employees, consumer protection, monopolies and restrictive trade practices, etc.
On account of increasing awareness of the people about their rights there has been considerable increase in litigation resulting in delay in dispensation of justice by the courts. This has led to alternative ave-nues for expeditious adjudication of disputes. One such mode which has been evolved with considerable success in Lok Adalats wherein the parties are able to amicably resolve disputes pre-litigation as well as pending in the courts.
It is found that many times on account of poverty, illiteracy or social and economic disability, a large number of people were not able to approach the courts for legal redressal. With a view to enable such people to obtain relief, the courts have relaxed the normal rules of procedure and have permitted a voluntary organisation or social action group or even an individual social worker to move the court and obtain relief for such persons. This branch of litigation, known as Public Interest Litigation, has been particularly helpful in securing justice to the weak, unorganised and exploited sections of society.
The Judicial System of India
India needs a vibrant judicial system to meet the many faceted Constitutional and legal situations. A system is itself a conglomeration of various set ups. In the present judicial set ups in our country different judicial forums including quasi-judicial forums, judges and advocates are playing very important roles in redressal of various grievances of the people and the country. For maintaining the efficiency and effectiveness of the legal-judicial system in the country there is need of a large number of brilliant, dedicated, fair and justice loving advocates and judicial officers. India lacks efficient and strong legal-judicial infrastructure. There is lack of burgeoning number of well equipped legal institutions, judicial forum, meritorious advocates and committed judges. In lower judiciary unlike the higher judiciary the judges are appointed through the competitive examinations conducted by the respective bodies of the concerned states. To be a judge is a very herculean task. It requires detail studies and practice (wherever applicable) in the court. Those who have mission to be a judge are doing hard labour in preparation of the competitive examinations. Through this blog attempt is being taken to collect and assemble the required essential materials for sure success in the judicial-legal services competitive examinations. Now legal-judicial services are very lucrative. The large number of concerned competent, competitive and ambitious bidders each and every year are coming to the fray and making their positions desired. Some ambitious aspirants lag behind due to the improper advice, insufficient material, improper guidelines and unconducive environment. It is hoped that this blog would be a healing touch for those who lag behind in such career buildings.
