RESEARCH PROJECT

On
Judicial reforms of Warren Hastings and the advent of Adalat System

Submitted to

MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, AURANGABAD

Submitted by
Hrithik Suryakant Chormare
B. A.LL.B. (Hons.) Semester-III
Roll No. 2020/BALLB/19
Paper 3.3: Legal and Constitutional History

Under the guidance of

Mr. Deeksha Ingle
Assistant Professor of History,
Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad

October 2021
 Declaration

This declaration is made at Nanded that, this project is prepared and drafted by, Hrithik
Chormare (me).

It contains the project work that was assigned to me during my 3rd Semester of my BA.LL.B,
and successfully accomplished from my side.

This project is a sincere attempt at compilation of the aforementioned work.

This has not been submitted, either in whole or in part, to any other Law University or
affiliated Institute under which any University is recognised by the Bar Council of India, for
the award of any other law degree or diploma, within the territory of India.

Hrithik Chormare
2020/BALLB/19
 Table of Contents
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 5

2. Judicial system in Mofussils .............................................................................................. 5

2.1. Connection between Revenue and judicial administration ......................................... 5

2.2. No centralized judicial set up ...................................................................................... 5

2.3. Corruption in the courts............................................................................................... 6

2.4. Atrocities of Englishmen ............................................................................................. 6

3. JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1772 ............................................................................................... 6

4. Different courts in Adalat System: (in order of the hierarchy) .......................................... 6

4.1. Small Cause Courts ..................................................................................................... 6

4.2. Mofussil or district courts ........................................................................................... 7

4.2.1. Mofussil Diwani Adalat: - ................................................................................... 7

4.2.2. Mofussil Nizamat Adalat: -.................................................................................. 7

4.3. Sadar or Provincial courts ........................................................................................... 7

4.3.1. Sadar Diwani Adalat: -......................................................................................... 7

4.3.2. Sadar Nizamat Adalat: - ....................................................................................... 7

5. New Civil and Criminal Procedures and Laws .................................................................. 8

6. An appraisal of the plan ..................................................................................................... 9

7. Defects of the 1772 Plan .................................................................................................... 9

7.1. Insufficient number of courts at village level (small causes courts) ........................... 9

7.2.Concentration of too much power in the hands of collector ............................................ 9

8. JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1774 ............................................................................................. 10

8.1.Features of Plan of 1774: - ............................................................................................. 10

8.1.1. Appointment of Amils/Diwans :-....................................................................... 10

8.1.2. Division: - .......................................................................................................... 10

8.1.3. Provincial Councils: - ........................................................................................ 10

9. Defects of the 1774 Plan .................................................................................................. 11

10. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 11
 1. Introduction

Following the British acquisition of the Diwani rights of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa in 1765,
the notion of Mofussils was coined to refer to the regions that surrounding the presidential
towns placed under British authority. Though there existed a well-established judicial system
in the presidential towns of Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras under the guise of Mayor's court
and Court of Governor-in-Council, the same was necessary in these neighbouring territories
to be known as Mofussils.

2. Judicial system in Mofussils

Following the acquisition of the Diwani rights by the colonial giant, the role of proper
implementation fell on the then governor of Bengal presidency- Warren Hastings, as his
predecessors, dating back to Lord Clive's time, had condoned the oppression of Ryots by
Zamindars and petty tyrants, which was proving to be detrimental to the colonial
administration in these areas. With such a compromised system in mind, Warren Hastings
went on to implement reformative judicial procedures for the following reasons:-

2.1.Connection between Revenue and judicial administration

Revenue administration was a critical function for the British, not to mention a major source
of their finances, but in order to collect revenue, property in the provinces was required, and
prosperity could only be maintained if there was an order of peace so that people were not
distracted from their occupational works, particularly those engaged in agricultural
occupation. Such a condition of peace would have given them motivation to improve, so that
they would eventually be able to pay their government dues. This peace and order was again
dependent on the protection of life and property, which could have been maintained only if
there had been a functioning legal system in place, which was not there at the time.

2.2.No centralized judicial set up

With the dissolution of the Mughal empire and the weakening of the Nawabs' power in
Bengal and surrounding areas, the only judicial system that existed broke down, and
everyone who had a local authority or power (Zamindars, for example) began to exercise
judicial power as well, in order to gain self-aggrandizement. The Kazis were no longer
chosen on the basis of their merit or character, but rather on the level of favour they bestowed
upon officials. And because they were not deserving, they began to abuse their authority
because there was no system of checks and balances in existence.

2.3.Corruption in the courts

Furthermore, even the courts that were so had become corrupt, as the courts used to charge
commissions from the parties on the amount that was recovered by them with the help of the
court, and this practise was against the very principle of natural justice, as such practise made
judges a party to the cause they decided by making them a profiteer from the case. This
technique was also widespread due to the judges' lack of motivation or incentive to behave
impartially. They were not even paid on a regular basis, so they were accustomed to the bribe
culture. Arthur Keith stated that "courts were more of a tool of power than a tool of justice."

2.4.Atrocities of Englishmen
The English intrusion worsened the judicial system. The servants of the corporation would
confiscate the lands or assets of any Indian against whom they had a claim. They also used to
detain such an Indian as a prisoner, refusing to release them until the claims or obligations
were fulfilled. In doing so, the company servants did not even seek the approval of the
officials of the Nawab's Government, which was too weak at the time and so had to overlook
such disagreements.

3. JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1772

Under the existing circumstances described above, Warren Hastings went on to develop a
plan of judicial administration in 1772, combined with a system of tax administration, which
laid the groundwork for India's Adalat system. The region of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa was
split into several districts under this scheme, and in each district, an English servant of the
company was appointed as the collector, who was responsible for tax collection as well as
judicial authority.

4. Different courts in Adalat System: (in order of the hierarchy)

4.1.Small Cause Courts

These courts were located in each hamlet or pergunnah and were meant to deal with minor or
insignificant issues. These courts' decisions used to be binding up to Rs.10 in value. These
tribunals were presided over by the village headman or the pergunnah's head farmer.
4.2.Mofussil or district courts

4.2.1. Mofussil Diwani Adalat: -

These courts were present in each district and had authority over revenue and civil issues,
including weddings, inheritance, castes, debts, contracts, disputed accounts, personal assets,
partnership, and rent demands. It used to have pecuniary jurisdiction of up to Rs500, which
meant that rulings of this court up to this sum were final. The collector of the district served
as the judge of this court, which collaborated with native law authorities such as Kazis and
Pundits. These law officials used to help the judge because the collector lacked understanding
of Hindu and Muslim personal laws, which were to be applied to various issues brought
before the court.

4.2.2. Mofussil Nizamat Adalat: -

Fauzdari Adalats were another name for these courts. These courts were also present in each
district, however, unlike the mofussil Diwani Adalat, they solely dealt with criminal issues.
Furthermore, it was not authorised to try cases involving death sentences or those requiring
the loss of the accused's property, since such matters had to be referred to Sadar Diwani
Adalat for final rulings. Only Muslim law officials presided over these courts. The Moulvi
used to interpret the law, while the Kazi and Mufti would issue Fatwas and pronounce
judgments based on them. However, in addition to these officials of the law, collectors used
to play a major part in these courts as a supervisor. He was responsible for ensuring that all
required witnesses were heard, that cases were tried in a timely manner, and that the verdicts
were fair.

4.3.Sadar or Provincial courts

4.3.1. Sadar Diwani Adalat: -

This was the province's highest civil court. It used to have both appellate and original
jurisdiction since it not only heard appeals from Mofussil Diwani Adalat, but it also took up
cases involving disputes worth more than Rs 500. On each petition or appeal, it used to
charge 5% of the sum at issue. It was ruled over by the governor and his council, and it was
located in Calcutta, the presidential town. On March 17, 1773, it had its inaugural meeting.

4.3.2. Sadar Nizamat Adalat: -

This was the province's highest criminal court. It used to have both original and appellate
jurisdiction, just as Sadar Diwani Adalat. As previously stated, it used to have particular
authority over matters involving death sentences and property forfeiture. The death warrant
was drafted by this Adalat and was to be signed by the Nawab as the Nizamat's head in cases
of death sentence. Daroga-I-Adalat presided over this court as a judge. A Chief Kazi, a Chief
Mufti, and three Moulvies assisted him. Similarly to Mofussil Nizamat Adalat, there used to
be a supervising authority in the shape of the Governor-in-Council who kept an eye on how
the court was operating. It was originally located in Calcutta but was later relocated to
Murshidabad, where the Nawab lived, to decrease the effort required to obtain his signature
in instances of death sentences. Another subsequent development was the establishment of
the Naib Nazim's office, in which Mohd. Reza Khan was appointed to work and grant assent
on behalf of the Nawab.

5. New Civil and Criminal Procedures and Laws

In the case of civil procedure, a rough and ready procedure for hearing civil cases was
adopted, according to which, after the plaintiff filed a petition of complaint, the defendant
was to give answers (reply), after which the Adalat was to hear the parties viva voce and, if
necessary, evidence was to be examined. The court issued a decree only after all of this had
occurred. Furthermore, a new limitation term of 12 years from the date of conflict was
introduced, with any lawsuit brought after that period being time barred. This clause is still
included in our procedural codes. In addition, a system of arbitration was established to
support the civil court's responsibilities.

In the case of criminal procedure and laws, the emphasis was moved to the creation of
procedure and regulations to ban dacoity and limit the use of mutilation as a form of
punishment. Dacoity was widespread throughout the country, and severe regulations were
enacted to curtail it. According to these rules, a dacoit would be executed if convicted, and
the village would be punished and the dacoit's family members would be become slaves of
the state. Warren Hastings was opposed to mutilation as a form of punishment because he
thought that mutilating a criminal rendered him a lifelong burden on society rather than
developing him as a person. However, these anti-mutilation laws remained only in writing
and were not implemented in practise due to objections from Muslim law officials who were
unwilling to stray from the principles of Muslim law.
 6. An appraisal of the plan

Given the constraints of the available resources, Warren Hastings' 1772 design was lauded
for its efficiency. Sir John William Kaye dubbed him "the Infant Administrator" because,
given the company's infancy, implementing such a system was a significant accomplishment
for the governor of Bengal. This system was commended for being unbiased and affordable,
as well as being easily available to the people, who did not have to go to provincial courts,
saving them time and money.

7. Defects of the 1772 Plan

7.1.Insufficient number of courts at village level (small causes courts)

There were very less number of small causes court present in the village areas and even the
courts which were there had pecuniary jurisdiction of upto Rs. 10 only which was too small
in amount in many cases. Thus, a dispute of slightly greater amount had to be referred to
district courts which again used to be expensive and time consuming for people living in
these areas which was in great number as the means of travel was not adequate.

7.2.Concentration of too much power in the hands of collector

Too much authority was concentrated in the hands of the collector in the district since they
used to be the administrator, tax collector, civil judge, and supervisor of criminal judicial
proceedings, which resulted in the following issues: -

i) Party to the revenue cases- Because he was the civil judge as well as the tax
collector, he was a party to the dispute, which violated the concept of justice.

ii) Carrying out their own private trade- The collector began carrying out their own
private commerce since they were able to monopolise their trade via their abilities
for their personal gain, even if it was to the harm of others.

iii) Difficulty in supervising collectors- It was difficult for the Calcutta council to
oversee and maintain track of the collectors because they were concerned with
their own duties and because communication was poor.
 8. JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1774

The flaws in the 1772 plan were recognised not only by Warren Hastings, but also by the
company director, who asked the governor and council to withdraw the collectors and search
for alternative arrangements. As a result, the Calcutta government went on to implement the
new plan for revenue collection and administration of justice on November 23, 1773, and put
it into effect in January 1774.

8.1.Features of Plan of 1774: -

8.1.1. Appointment of Amils/Diwans :- The collectors were replaced by Amils or Diwans

selected in each area. He was to be the tax collector as well as the judge of Mofussil
Diwani Adalat.

8.1.2. Division: - The area of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa was split into six divisions, with
headquarters at Calcutta, Murshidabad, Dinajpur, Dacca, and Patna, and each division
commanded numerous districts. For example, the Patna division included the whole
state of Bihar.

8.1.3. Provincial Councils: - In each division, a Provincial Council comprised of 4-5

covenanted servants of the corporation was formed, with the following functions:

i) Revenue collection supervision– They were tasked with supervising Amil revenue
collection.

ii) Hear appeals from Mofussil Diwani Adalat– They used to hear appeals from
Mofussil Diwani Adalat, with an appeal to Sadar Diwani Adalat if the issue was
worth more than Rs. 1000. As a result, it formed a link between Mofussil Diwani
Adalat and Sadar Diwani Adalat, and any matter, regardless of value, may be
appealed to the Provincial Council.

iii) Court of first instance– It also had original jurisdiction and served as court of first
instance in the divisions where it was located, so that issues occurring in the
division town (headquarters) may be promptly referred to it.
It was advantageous since an appeal system was established close to district adalats, allowing
for oversight of the work of district judges, which was not feasible in the prior situation of
governor and council.

9. Defects of the 1774 Plan

Members of the provincial council, like collectors, were potentially nefarious and might have
monopolised commerce within their authority. They were more distrustful than collectors
because collectors were junior servants who could be controlled by the governor and council,
whereas these members were senior members of the company with the same status as any
member of the council, and thus the governor and council could not control their actions due
to their pull and influence. As a result, those who put themselves at the mercy of the
Provincial Council would be afraid to speak out against their unfair treatment.

10. Conclusion

It was stated that the system was ahead of its time.The governor general of Bengal sought to
correct every little shortcoming. The system thus established was also aided by the
Regulating Act of 1773, which resulted in the establishment of the supreme court with the
goal of separating the judicial administration from the revenue administration, as the two
were inextricably linked because the same officers frequently performed both the duties of
revue collection and adjudication, but this was not achieved as expected, and thus another
attempt was made to eliminate the deficiency in the form of reorganisation.

The Provincial Councils, which had been tasked with both revenue collection and justice,
were now limited to revenue collection and revenue case handling, with all judicial functions
being delegated to diwan adalats established in each of the Provincial Councils, namely
Calcutta, Murshidabad, Dacca, Burdwan, Dinapur, and Patna.

Even after this reform, the adalat system was unable to attain the perfection that Hastings
intended, but the presence of such a judicial administration structure was commendable in
and of itself. This method paved the way for the current judicial system.
 References & Bibliography

1. https://www.legalbites.in/adalat-system-reforms-warren-hastings/

2. http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/252/Development-of-Adalat-System-during-the-
time-of-Warren-Hastings.html

3. https://blog.ipleaders.in/judicial-reforms-warren-hastings-advent-adalat-system/

4. https://www.theleaflet.in/warren-hastings-era-beginning-of-indias-legal-system/

5. https://www.lawcolumn.in/warren-hastings-plan-of-1772-adalat-system/

6. Sinha, C. (1969). Doctrinal Influences on the Judicial Policy of the East India Company’s
Administration in Bengal, 1772-1833. The Historical Journal, 12(2), 240–248.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2637803