Introduction

The Patna Case is one of the very interesting cases in the field of Indian History. The Patna
Case took place in years of 1777, 1778 and 1779. The Patna Case took eminent place in the
Indian legal history because it had revealed the of the system judicial administration. This
case brought the light on the involving conflict and desertification among the Supreme Court
and the supreme council. This case had made as the lesson learned that had become the basis
of the further reorganization or reorientation in the operation or management of justice that
will take in future.

In the words of Dr. M. P. Jain, the Patna case exposed the judicial administration of the
Company. In fact the Patna case is an illustration of various defects and weaknesses in the
adalat system in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The facts of the case were as given below.

The Patna case is an example of a clear cut case of the confliction that arose between the
company's courts and the Supreme Court and finally between the latter and the Governor-
General and Council because of the obscurity of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Of course
it also throws light on the bad state of affairs in the Company's courts and the Supreme
Court's desire to improve it. In this case a suit for damages was filed in the Supreme Court in
the latter half of 1777 by Naderah Begum, a widow, against her husband's nephew, Bahadur
Beg, (and her husband was Shahbaz Beg who was a servant of the company) the Qazi of
Patna and two Muftis of Patna's provincial court, for injuries alleged to have been done to
her, in consequence of the orders and of a degree of the Council at Patna, acting as a court of
justice.
1. Facts of the Case:

o Shahbaz Beg Khan belonged to KABUL1 and came to India and joined a company
Army and then he got retired. After that he earned extensive riches and settled at
Patna and married one Nadirah Begum.
o Since, he called his nephew Bahadur beg from Kabul to live with him. He additionally
communicated his longing to adopt Bahadur Beg as his son and make him the heir of
his property and then to retire from the world.
o But before he could give impact to his wish, he died in December, 1776.
o Shahbaz Beg left impressive property behind him which led to battle for property
between and the nephew. Each one of them claimed the whole property of the
expired.
o Bahadur Beg2 filed a petition the Provincial Council at Patna, asserting the property in
the limit of being the adopted son the deceased. He also requested the court to protect
the property from being abused by the widow of the deceased. The Nadirah Begum
designates the Mohammedan Native Law officers i.e. Mufti and Kazi to find out his
claim in the property.
o The widow Nadirah Begum, then again, asserted her claim to the said property on the
basis of three documents are:
o Dower – Deed (Meharnama)
o Gift – Deed (Hibanama)
o Acknowledgment (Ikrarnama)
o The Provincial Court of Patna directed the Kazi and Mufti set up a stock of the
property and gather and seal it till an official choice. These native law officers were
also to report to the Court about the separate claims of the parties after ascertaining
the facts of the case.
o In compatibility of the Provincial Council's orders, the Kazi and Mufti went house of
the deceased and gathered the property and took stock of it.

1
Dr. N.V.Paranjpe.Indian Legal & Constitutional History [pg no. 72]
2
The nephew of Shahbaz Beg
 o During the investigation they abused Nadirah Begum as a result of which, she left the
house and took shelter in a "Durgah".
o The methodology followed by the law –officers in this case was most irregular. After
inquiry the case they defer their report to the Patna Council. On the basis of evidence,
the Kazi reported3, that widow's agent (counsel) had neglected to deliver the dower
deed in this manner, there was nothing invalidate the attestations of Bahadur Beg that
the sum of Rs.1200/- as dower was already paid by the deceased to Nadirah Begum
during his life- time. As respects the other two documents, namely, the gift-deed and
acknowledgment-deed, the law-officers recommended that they were invalid being
forged and, therefore, the property of the deceased should be divided into four shares,
out of which three should be given to Bahadur Beg as illustrative of his dad in India
and the fourth offer ought to be go Nadirah Begum in accordance with the
Mohammedan Law of succession.

o The Provincial Council of Patna acknowledged the report of the Kazi and Mufti and
requested the division of the property in like manner. In any case, aggrieved by the
decision of the Provincial Council, Nadirah Begum favored an interest to Sadar
Diwani Adalat at Calcutta which comprised Governor – General and Council be that
as it may, the interest stayed pending for quite a while with no activity. Subsequently
the dowager brought an activity against Bahadur Beg, Kazi and Mufti for assault,
battery, false imprisonment and penetrate coercively into her house and other secret
injuries and allege damages to the chorus of rupees six lakhs.

2. Issues of the case:

The legal issues that were raised in the trial, which was started in November 1778, were

. 1. Whether Bahadur Beg, who lived outside Calcutta was Subject to the jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court;4

3
On 20 January 1777
4
http://kamkus.org/coursematerial/Unit-%20II%20-%20Legal%20History-III
2. Whether the law officers could be prosecuted for acts done in their judicial capacity. The
Supreme Court decided both the issues in affirmative. On the first issue the court said that
Bahadur was a farmer of revenue and he was not different from the revenue collector and
therefore was directly or indirectly in the services of the Company. On the second issue the
court held that although the Patna Council was a legally constituted court having jurisdication
to decide the civil disputes between Indians, it had no jurisdiction to delegate its functions to
the law officers, the Qazi and the Muftis. After the rejection of these jurisdictional issues the
defendants pleaded not guilty. The only question which the Court now had to decide was
whether trespass and assault was committed and since it found that Naderah was in
possession of the property at the time the defendants proceeded against her and the property
their guilt was proved. The Court awarded Rs. 30000 damages and Rs. 9208-8 annas as cost
to Naderah. The defendants were brought to Calcutta. Qazi died on the way and the rest of
them were put in jail because they failed to pay the damages awarded by the Court. They
remained in jail till 12 August 1782 when they were released on a bond executed by the
Company in accordance with the provisions of the Act of Settlement, 1781. An appeal was
also filed in the Privy Council in 1781 which was dismissed in 1789 for want of prosecution.
Later in March 1779, Naderah filed a similar case against the members of the Patna Council.
Supreme Court, rejecting the plea of the defendant that they acted in their judicial capacity
held that their entireproceedings were illegal and corrupt and accordingly awarded Rs. 15000
as damages.

o Whether Bahadur Beg, who lived outside Calcutta was exposed to the administration
of Supreme Court or not.
o Whether the law officers could be litigated or indicted for their acts done during their
legal proficiency or not.5

3. Judgment of the Case:

The court censured the way in which the Kazi and Mufti had represented determining
realities. All the procedures in the board were ex-parte with no I see being given to the
begum. No normal preliminary was held and witnesses had not been analyzed on oath. Thus,

5
www. Wikipedia.com
the law officers were attempted not for what they had done in the release of their customary
capacity; however to something outside thereto the court had an undoubted ward over the
organization hirelings.

The Supreme Court granted harms of Rupees 3 Lakhs to the dowager which was very in
proportionate.

On 2 January 1777 Bahadur Beg filed a suit in Patna Council alleging that he was the adopted
son or Sahbaz and therefore entitled to entire property. He also prayed that Naderah be
stopped from removing the property and the property already removed be restored. The same
day Patna Council ordered the Qazi and the two Muftis to make an inventory of the property
of Sahbaz and allot the shares of each claimant according to Mohammadan Law. After taking
the evidence on both sides the Qazi and Muftis reported to the Patna Council on 20 January
1770 that the gift deed was forged and that the property of the deceased be divided into four
shares, whereof three should be given to Bahadur Khan, his father being the legal heir of the
deceased and himself the adopted son, and the remaining share to Naderah, the deceased'
widow. Accepting the decision of the law officers the Patna Council ordered its execution.
The law officers started executing the order which was resisted by Naderah, who feeling
humiliated took refuse in a Durgah. After sometime Naderah came to Calcutta and filed a
case for trespass and assault in the Supreme Court against Bahadur Beg, Qazi and the two
Muftis. The Governor-General and Council resolved to defend the case on behalf of the
Defendants because they were being prosecuted in the exercise of their judicial powers.6

4. Analysis of the Case:

An impartial examination of the case demonstrates that gross anomalies were conferred by
the commonplace committee in giving this case. The law officer were just to elucidate the
law and choose question of certainty yet the court found that they were endowed with the
whole work of examination. They ought not to have analyzed the witnesses themselves as
this was crafted by the judge of the common gathering.7

6 http://kamkus.org/coursematerial/Unit-%20II%20-%20Legal%20History-III

7
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-233
The Patna case additionally uncovered the shortcomings of the organization legal
organization, especially that of the sadar diwani adalat at calcutta in light of the fact that the
senator general and the individual from the gathering, who constituted the court barely had
whenever to take care of the legal work of choosing claims as they were for the most part
possessed with different works and avenging their shared competitions.

As respects the ward of the preeminent court over the Mohammedan local law officers, it was
held that these officers being in the administration of the organization, the court had purview
over them. This view has all the earmarks of being right. be that as it may, the preeminent
courts dispute that it additionally had ward over Bahadur ask who was an agriculturist of land
income of the organization and henceforth a worker of the organization , does not have all the
earmarks of being right. the supreme courts choice in Patna case holding that an agriculturist
of land income was to be dealt with in the administration of the organization and
consequently fell inside the ward of the court, made dread and frenzy among the local
ranchers of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. Along these lines this case had an adverse affected the
income winning of the organization in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The weaknesses of the
organization of the incomparable court and the preeminent committee which became known
through the Patna Case were, anyway, evacuated by the death of the Act of Settlement in
1781.8

8
Dr. N.V.Paranjape , Indian legal & constitutional History [pg no. 75]
 Summary of the case

One Shahbaz Beg, a soldier in the Company’s army, had no son and so he called his nephew
Bahadur Beg from Kabul to live with him. He expressed a desire to adopt Bahadur Beg and
to hand over his property to him. But before he could do so, he died in 1776. Thereafter, a
struggle ensued for property between Bahadur Beg and Shabhaz’s widow Nadira Begum. The
Begum claimed entire property on the basis of gift said to have been executed in her favour
by her late husband. Bahadur Beg claimed the entire property as the adopted son of the
deceased; he filed a suit against the Begum in the Patna Provincial Council which also
functioned as a Diwani Court for the town. The Patna Council remitted the entire case to its
law officers Kazis and Muftis md required them to make an inventory of property of the
deceased, to collect the property and seal it, and according to “ascertained facts and legal
justice” to transmit to the Council a written report specifying the shares of parties. Under the
Regulations then prevailing, the law officers were neither to perform any executive functions
nor were they to concern themselves with deciding the questions of fact, their only function
was to expound the law applicable to the facts of the case. The law officers locked and sealed
the house of the deceased. The widow of the deceased was insulted and humiliated to such an
extent that she left the house and took refuge in a mosque. They rejected her claim holding
that ^it deeds were forged. As Muslim law does not recognize adoption, Bahadur Beg’s claim
was also rejected. The deceased’s property was thus to be divided according to the Muslim
law of intestate succession. The widow approached the Supreme Court and filed an action
against Bahadur Beg, the Kazis and Muftis for assault breaking and entering her house and
taking away her property, and claimed damages amounting to Rupees 6 lakhs. Bahdur Beg,
Kazi and Mutis were arrested and brought from Patna to Calcutta and were lodged in prison.
The legal issues raised in trial, which started in November 1078, were, (1) Whether Bahadur
Beg, who lived outside Calcutta was subject 10 the jurisdiction of Supreme Court, and (2)
Whether the law officers could be prosecuted for acts done in their judicial capacity? On the
first issue, the court said that Bahadur Beg was a farmer of land revenue and he was not
different from the revenue Collector and therefore was ‘directly or indirectly in the services
of the Company’. On the second issue, the court held that although the Patna council was a
legally constituted court having jurisdiction to decide the civil disputes between the Indians,
it had no jurisdiction to delegate its functions to the law officers, the Kazi and Muftis. The
court criticized the manner in which the Kazi and Muftis had acted for ascertaining facts. All
the proceedings in the Council were ex parte without any I notice being given to the Begum.
No regular trial was held and witnesses had not been examined on oath. Thus, the law
officers were tried not for what they had done in the discharge of their regular functions, but
for something outside thereto the court had an undoubted jurisdiction over the Company’s
servants. The Supreme Court awarded damages of Rupees 3 lakhs to the widow which was
quite in proportionate. The Patna case brought to light the inherent defects in the Dmpany’s
judicial system (that is Adalats and Councils). Also, the case involved he question of the
Supreme Court jurisdiction and its relationship with the officials Of the Adalats. A lesson
was perhaps learnt, which became the basis of further reforms in administration of justice
carried out later.
 Conclusion

Patna Case is one of the eminent cases in the subject of legal history of India. It has provided
us with the knowledge that during the performance of any duty or authority given to any legal
official should be exercised or conducted within the ambit of their specified field. This case
has also dealt with such situation in which the officials were authorized by the court of law to
investigate into the matter of Nadirah Begum and Bahadur Beg to find out the documents and
other related information to the case, but during this procedure the officials i.e. Kazi and
Mufti conducted bad behavior towards Nadirah Begum while entering her house and
performance of assault, battery and false imprisonment. Accordingly by seeing all this
Supreme Court gave the judgment in favor of Nadirah Begum and these officials were
charged with the Punishment of imprisonment along with the fine of Rs. 3 Lakhs to Nadirah
Begum. Over all this mishaps, Supreme Court gave the right decision/ verdict that had
maintained the trust of citizens in judiciary.

While this case exposes the irregularities committed by the provincial councils in leaving
their function to the law officers and the Supreme Court's concern to condemn it, it also
establishes the obscurity about the Court's jurisdiction and consequent difficulties caused to
the Company's administration in India. Ultimately the entire loss fell on the Company
because not only it had to pay the decree amount but also had to pay some compensation to
the Qazi's children and Muftis.
 BIBILOGRAPHY

 Paranjape N.V. ,INDIAN LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY

CENTRAL LAW AGENCY , ALLAHBAD

SEVENTH EDITION , 2017

OTHER REFERENCE:

 http://kamkus.org/coursematerial/Unit-%20II%20-%20Legal%20History-III

 http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-233

 www.wikipedia.com