Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

RAJA NAND KUMAR CASE: CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Ayush Dhanraj Gupta, Thakur Ramnarayan College of Law

ABSTRACT:

The Raja Nand Kumar case involved a prominent figure in colonial Bengal
accused of forgery and bribery. The trial's fairness and legality have been
disputed. Some argue it was a judicial murder, while others contend it was
legally valid. The key issue revolves around whether the Forgery Act of 1728
applied to Calcutta, where the trial took place. Questions also arose about the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over Nand Kumar, who was detained as a
prisoner in Calcutta. The trial's conduct raised concerns, given Impey's close ties
to Hastings and the refusal to consider appeals or show mercy. This suggests
potential bias against Nand Kumar, adding complexity to the case. The Raja
Nand Kumar case, while not a judicial murder, signifies a miscarriage of justice.
The proceedings were marked by potential bias and legal uncertainties,
challenging the ideals of an independent judiciary and rule of law. Nand Kumar's
fate serves as a reminder of the potential for injustice within legal systems, even
in the pursuit of noble principles.

Keywords: Raja Nand Kumar Case, Warren Hastings, Clive's period, Black
Colonel, East India Company, Councilors (Barewell, Francis, Clavering,
Monson), Bribery and Corruption charges, Supreme Court (Calcutta), Forgery
Act 1728, Chief Justice Impey, Jurisdiction of Supreme Court, Fairness of trial,
Predetermination, Miscarriage of Justice, Rule of law, Independent judiciary,
Death penalty, Privy Council, British Crown, B.N. Pandey (historian), Radha
Charan case, Macaulay (historian), Ex post facto law, Predetermination

Page: 1
Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Summary of Trial:

Nand Kumar, a Brahmin was a big Zamindar and very influential person in Bengal. He very loyal
to East India Company during Clive’s period and also named or was called as “Black Colonel”.
Coming toward Warren Hastings, his council was divided into two groups. In one the Governor-
General Hastings and Councilor Barewell and in another were Councilors viz. Francis, Clavering
and Monson this group was against of Warren Hastings in every decision as they had the majority.
One day Raja Nand Kumar was encouraged by the majority councilors to bring certain charges of
Bribery and Corruption against Warren Hastings before council.1

In March 1775, Raja Nand Kumar gave letter to Francis and in letter Nand Kumar stated that
Warren Hastings has accepted bribe of rupees one lakh or more for the appointment of his son that
is Gurudas as a Diwan, and also from Munni begum rupees one lakh fifty thousand for appointing
her as a guardian of infant Nawab. The letter presented by Francis and motion passed by Monson,
Raja Nand Kumar was called before the council but Warren Hastings and his supporter Barewell
opposed it by saying the council is not competent enough so Nand Kumar should go to Supreme
Court. But the majority examined the case and Raja Nand Kumar and declared that the charges
leveled on Hastings are true and directed Hastings to deposit rupees 354,105 which was accepted
by him from Nand Kumar and Munni Begum in the company’s treasury. This event annoyed
Warren Hastings and he began to hate Nand Kumar.

And Soon after Nand Kumar was prosecuted by Warren Hastings and Barewell for conspiracy
against them. This event indicated that this step was taken by Hastings with retaliation motive to
ruin Nand Kumar. It was difficult to prove conspiracy so Hastings brought another charge of
Forgery against Nand Kumar. In May 1775, the charge of forgery against Nand Kumar was
presented before Supreme Court by Mohan Prasad but the real mover was Warren Hastings. The
charge was that in 1770 Nand Kumar forged the bond. Thus Nand Kumar was tired before Supreme
Court with the help of jury that found him guilty and sentenced him Death penalty under an Act
passed by British Parliament in 1728.2

1
Sharma, N., 2022. India's First Judicial Murder during British Colonization. Issue 3 Indian JL & Legal Rsch., 4, p.1.
2
India, E.-J. (2021) Justice india, E-Justice. Available at : https://www.ejusticeindia.com/case-summary-raja-nand-
kumar-case/

Page: 2
Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Several attempts were made to save Raja Nand Kumar the application was presented before
Supreme Court to allow appeal to King in Council but the application was rejected by SC. Another
application was also presented before SC to recommend Mercy before British Crown but SC
refused to forward it. Ultimately Raja Nand Kumar was hanged on 5th August 1775.

Critical Analysis:

We will deal this Case with Four Questions are as follows,

1. Was it a Judicial Murder?

The legality, validity and fairness of the trial have been a debatable issue. Some of historians have
criticized that in the trial there was some conspiracy between Hastings and Chief Justice Impey to
put Nand Kumar to death and therefore it was a judicial murder. But the learned author B.N.
Pandey has tried to prove that the trial was legal, valid and fair and was no conspiracy between
Governor General and Chief Justice in his book.

So here the another argument arise that

2. Whether the Forgery Act 1728 was extended to Calcutta?

According to Chief Justice Impey the English law was introduced in India by the charter of 1726
and thereafter by charter of 1735. The Forgery Act of 1728 which was enacted before 1753 was
thus applicable to Calcutta. Even before the establishment of Supreme Court the Act of Forgery
was administered in India by the English Courts. For e.g. In Radha Charan case he was prosecuted
for the charge of forgery and was sentenced a death penalty, although the sentence was not
executed because Court of Directors granted pardon thus the forgery act was applied to India even
before Nand Kumar case.

However there is also a other side to it which say’s The Forgery Act 1728 was not extended to
Calcutta. The trial was not legal and fair; many historians have agreed with this view and rejected
Impey’s opinion. Another Chief Justice in 1802 held that English Law introduced in Presidency
Town with the charter of 1726 and not with the charter of 1753 and therefore Forgery Act was not
applicable to Calcutta and even after Nand Kumar no Indian was tired and convicted under it. The

Page: 3
Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

Forgery Act of 1728 was not formally promulgated in Calcutta and was not known to the natives
including Nand Kumar and therefore it was illegal and unfair the same view was of Macaulay. No
doubt, Ignorance of law is no excuse but this is applied only when the law is formally published
in the country.

*Point to be noted is that Nand Kumar was convicted under ex post facto law; The offence of
forgery was alleged to have been committed in 1770 much before the establishment of the Supreme
Court in 1774, which was against the spirit of the English law and universally acknowledged
principles.

3. Whether Raja Nand Kumar was under the Jurisdiction of Supreme Court?

The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was over all inhabitants of Calcutta including Europeans
and Englishmen and Natives. So. If Raja Nand Kumar was an inhabitant of Calcutta the SC had
jurisdiction over him. According to Justice Impey Nand Kumar was inhabitant of Calcutta but the
view of Impey was not right. At the commission of forgery he was not the resident of Calcutta he
was brought and detained in Calcutta as a prisoner. Hence he was not under the jurisdiction of
Supreme Court. Beside this the alleged offence was committed in 1770 before the establishment
of SC in 1774 so it was not in the jurisdiction of Supreme Court.

4. Whether the trial was fair and justified?

The fairness and the impartiality of the Justice Impey has been doubtful where the witness of Raja
Nand Kumar were cross-examined by all the judges of the Supreme Court the language used by
them and procedure used by them was unknown to the Indian witness which resulted in collapse
of Nand Kumar’s defense. After that an application was presented to appeal in King in council but
was denied by Supreme Court another application of Mercy to British Crown was also denied by
Supreme Court this shows that the Chief Justice Impey was predetermined to put Nand Kumar to
death and therefore refused to listen any plea.

*Impey was a school friend of Hastings so according to certain historians the friendship between
them led to conclusion that Impey put Nand Kumar urgently to death to gratify Hastings who was

Page: 4
Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

his school friend. To take the revenge of bribery charge Hastings considered him his personal
enemy and with the help and cooperation of his school friend he tried and convicted Nand Kumar.

Conclusion:

After the trial review we find that majority historians were against to the fairness and legality of
the trial. The fact that everybody is equal before the law and the court is independent and not under
the control of executive Impey was not in favour of showing mercy to Nand Kumar and
consequently not in the favour of granting him leave to appeal in Privy Council or in the favour of
recommending his case for mercy to Crown. This proves that there was some sort of
predetermination or motive to punish Nand Kumar and if there was some predetermination then
the trial was unfair. It is correct that Impey was to establish independent judiciary and rule of law
in India but it was also correct that he himself does not follow rule of law in Nand Kumar case and
acted with predetermination or motive to punish him and his act cannot be justified if was not to
gratify Hastings and to develop rule of law and independent judiciary. We may conclude that it
was not a Judicial Murder but it was Miscarriage of Justice. Meaning when innocent person being
punished or a guilty person being free due to error made in court

Page: 5
Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research Volume V Issue IV | ISSN: 2582-8878

REFERENCE:

A. Rai Kailash. History of Courts Legislature & Legal Profession in India. Allahabad Law
Agency 1985.

B. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Regulating Act". Encyclopedia Britannica, 29

Dec. 2010, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Regulating-Act.

C. Sharma, N., 2022. India's First Judicial Murder during British Colonization. Issue 3 Indian
JL & Legal Rsch..

D. India, E.-J. (2021) Justice india, E-Justice. Available at :

https://www.ejusticeindia.com/case-summary-raja-nand-kumar-case/

E. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. "Nand Kumar". Encyclopedia Britannica, 1

Aug. 2023, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Nand-Kumar.

Page: 6