Introduction

Warren Hastings was the first and most prominent of the British Governers-general of India,
who influenced Indian events from 1772 to 1785.1 The influence of warren Hastings in laying
the foundation of Britain’s Empire in India is second only to that of Clive. While Clive made
his mark primary in the military realm, Hastings contribution was administrative.

He initiated his career as a writer in east India company at Calcutta in 1750. He had advanced
constantly from the position of writer, lowest rank in the company’s service, to the civilian
ladder.2 Important events under his power comprises trial of Nand Kumar and raja Chait
singh of Banaras, codification of Hindu and Muslim laws, first and second Anglo Maratha
wars, abolition of dual system and many more.

He implemented many reforms in all areas of administration. The regulating act 1773 and
Pitts India Act, 1784 were important acts passed during his tenure. He was accused also of
corruption by Edmund burke and parliament.3 “ He was put on trial against humanity in a
seven- year long impeachment in British Parliament.”4

Aim and ojective

The main object behind this research is to examine and evaluate the history of British rule in
India at the time of Warren Hastings with respect to the advent of Adalat system, early
administration , judicial judgements and largely focusing on his impeachment.

Research methodology

The purpose of this project is to discover answers to questions through the understanding of
British rule in India at the time of warren Hastings. The nature of the research used in this
project is doctrinal research i.e. research used by the information of various credible sources
which makes the data more reliable and admissible to an extent. The project uses all the
secondary sources available. Secondary sources such as articles, books, journals and websites
It uses internet sources and various books available to understand and analyse the concept.

1
P.J. Marshall, Warren Hastings- British colonial administrator, January 26, 2020.
2
Mahesh Shantaram, role of warren Hastings as the governer of Bengal, January 26,2020.
3
Warren Hastings published by British museum quarterly, volume 7, no. 3 (1933).
4
Brian Smith, Edmund burke, the warren hastings trial, and the moral dimension of corruption, volume 40,
number 1, January 2008.
Research questions

1. Who abolished the dual system in India?

2. Critical analysis of Rohilla war?
3. What are the major judgements by Warren Hastings?
4. Advent of civil services in India.
5. What is the judicial plan of 1772?
6. Impeachment and trial of Warren Hastings.

Early administration of warren hastings

Many administrators realised that to govern Indian society, it was important to learn its
various, social, legal customs and precedents. The importance of such knowledge to the
colonial government was in hasting’s mind when he remarked in 1784.

REGULATING ACT 1773

This was the first act declared by the British Parliament to direct the issue of management
and to regulate the affairs of East India Company. This act made the presidencies of Bombay
and Madras as subordinate to presidency of Calcutta. This act also established India’s first
supreme court at fort William, Calcutta with one chief justice and three other judges. 5 The
court has the full civil, criminal and ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

The court was able to exercise subjects residing in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The appeal
against the courts, decision was to be the King-in-council in England. Supreme court had
given allowance to accept the cases against the governor general and his council members,
but court had no power to arrest or imprison any of them in any action.6

ABOLITION OF DUAL SYSTEM

Warren Hastings put an end to the dual system in Bengal. This system was introduced by lord
clive in his detailed and extensive plan for reforms.7 This system was very favourable to the
British because the British had all the power in the reign, they did not have any of the
responsibilities or obligation. Warren Hastings was aware of the fact that this dual system is

5
James P. Welch, THE BRITISH RAJ AND INDIA: BRITISH COLONIAL INFLUENCE: 1612-1948, research gate,
September 2011.
6
Mahesh Shantaram, ROLE OF WARREN HASTINGS AS THE GOVERNER OF BENGAL, 17 march, 2020.
7
WARREN HASTINGS, MAKER OF BRITISH INDIA, published by journal of the royal central Asian society, vol 22,
1935, issue 3.
the unofficial control of the British over the Bengal and this would be opposed by the
international diplomatic etiquette at the Hague ( the Dutch parliament).8

Therefore, he found another ground of dual system through which he was able to maintain the
reign while maintaining the illusion of a local authority still being in power. The dual system
was finally abolished in 1772 by Warren Hastings.

Rohilla war (1774)

The tiny kingdom of Rohilkhand was under the Rohillas. After the demise of Aurangzeb,
Rohilkhand desired to become a non-dependent kingdom but the nawab of Oudh had brought
under his safeguarding.

Hafiz Rahmat Khan, the emperor of Rohilkhand blend and increase his strength and
expanded his kingdom. However, Marathas were keeping eye on Rohilkhand. Conjecturing
their designs, the Rohillas asked for the assistance from the nawab of Oudh. Britishers also
desired that Rohilkhand should come under the power of their friend, the Nawab of Oudh.

The Nawab agreed to assist the Rohillas if the Marathas attacked them and for this assistance
Nawab would be given Rs. Forty lakhs. The Marathas attacked Rohilkhand in 1773 but had
to go back without initiating war because of the unanticipated death of Madhav Rao Peshwa. 9
However, he asked for the amount but hafiz Rahman khan denied to pay. 10 After that, the
nawab of Oudh asked the British for assistance to attack Rohilkhand and assured that besides
paying the expenses of army, he would also pay Rs. Forty lakhs to them. This offer was
accepted by Warren Hastings. He sent British troops and defeated Rohillas.

This particular event led the conduct of warren Hastings under “sever censure” in England.
Lord Macaulay charged Warren Hastings for looking on heartlessly when the Rohillas
villages were burnt, their off springs were slaughtered and their women were sexually
harassed. It was called an “Un-British” operation.

8
Warren Hastings, THE BRITISH MUSEUM QUARTERLY, vol. 7, No.3(1933), pp.101, jstor.
9
Sydney C. Grier, WARREN HASTINGS, VOL. 3,no. 11(October,1918), p.161.
10
The editors of encyclopaedia Britannica, ROHILLA WAR, 18 March 2020.
The trial of nand kumar

Nand Kumar was an influential Bengali Zamindar, who was detrimental to Warren Hastings.
Some members of the council were also antagonistic to the Warren Hastings and they
collaborate to file a case against the Governor general with the assistance of Nand kumar. In
1775 Nand Kumar filed a case against Warren Hastings in council for receiving three and a
half lakhs from the widow Mir Jafar. In repugnance he de-established the council. However,
the council asked him to give away that amount to company’s treasury.

After this warren Hastings brought counter-charge against the Bengali zamindar in the
supreme court. He was put arrested on the charge of fraud and cheating. The lack of evidence
could not prove the charge of bribery against the governor general but the charges of fraud
and cheating against the Bengali zamindar were proved and the latter was hanged till death in
majority decision of the supreme court. After the trial, when Nanda Kumar was held guilty by
the court he filed an appeal for granting leave to appeal to the king-in-council but the court
rejected his appeal.

This act of trial and execution of death by hanging was clearly a judicial murder and was also
known as “scandalous travesty of decency”. This type of punishment was excessive and even
no justice was given because nowhere in the Indian law death was specified as a punishment
for fraud or cheating.

Patna case

Shahbah beg khan, was the native of kabul who came to India and joined a company and then
settled down in Patna. He married Nadirah Begum and obtained a huge amount of money
while in the service of the company. He was having no issues in India so he called his
nephew Bahadur Beg to Patna and wanted to adopt him as his son and make him the heir of
his property. But before he could do so he died in December, 1776.11

He left his property behind him which became the point of dispute between his wife, Nadirah
begum and his nephew, Shahbaz bahadur beg. Bahadur Beg filed a case against the begum in
the Patna Provincial Council for getting right over the property. He also appealed the court to
safeguard the property from being misused by the widow of the deceased. In response,

11
D.N. Saha, THE REVOLT OF RAJA CHAIT SINGH AND ITS REPURCUSSIONS ON OUDH AND BIHAR, vol. 39,
vol(1978), pp.740.
Nadirah Begum, then , asserted her claim to the property in dispute with the support of three
documents namely:-

Dower- deed(Meharnama)

Gift-deed (Hibanama)

Acknowledgement(Ikrarnama)

In the provincial court the case placed before Muhammadan law officers. The officers after
proper investigation informed the council that the gift deeds were fraud documents and no
gift was made in favour of Nadirah Begum by deceased. They also informed that the nephew,
Bhadur Beg cannot be adopted under Muslim law.

Therefore, the court came to the conclusion that property should be divided into four parts out
of which three parts were to be given to the nephew on the basis of affinity and the fourth
part be given to the widow with the Mohammedan law of succession.

The widow was not convinced with the decision of the provincial council, and she filed an
appeal before the sardar-Diwani-Adalat at Calcutta. With no response, she then approached
supreme court against Bahedur Beg, kazi and mufti for assault, battery, unlawful
imprisonment and claimed six lakhs as damages.

The supreme court decided that the documents were authentic and that kazi and mufti did not
act in a good faith. The court had given Rs. 3,00,000 as damages in favour of deceased’s wife
and the law officers were imprisoned. This case was criticised on the grounds of jurisdiction.

Civil services of india

Civil Services in India are bequest of the British rule. The position of district magistrate was
first created in 1772 and this happened under Warren Hastings who was then the newly
appointed governor of Bengal.12 The idea behind this change was to vanish Indians from
revenue administration and make the British the only caretaker of the resources.

Revenue collection was the main work of the district collector. His areas of operation also
extend to the maintenance of law and order in order to collect the revenue harmoniously.
Later on, the civil services were reformed and rationalized by Lord Cornwallis and so he is
known as the “father of Indian civil service”.

12
W.H. Hutton, A LETTER OF WARREN HASTINGS ON THE CIVIL SERVICE OF THE EAST INDIA COMPANY, oxford
university press, vol.44, no.176(oct. 1929), pp. 634
The attention is to be given to the fact that in that period of Warren Hastings, revenue was
collected only by the Britishers and Indians were completely excluded because the British
desired an administration based on British ideas and practices; the capability and coherence
of Indians were not trusted. Later on, over a tenure of many years, there were various
realignment in the organisation of the civil services and finally Indians were appointed to the
desired services.

Literature

Warren Hastings was involved in the English translation of the Bhagavad Gita, which led to
the first English translation appearing in 1785. The introduction of Bhagavad Gita was
written by Warren Hastings which was translated by Charles Wilkins.

Judicial plan of 1772

The judicial administration was introduced alongside a system of revenue administration by

Warren Hastings. This led to the foundation of Adalat system in India. In conjunction with
this program, the reigns of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa were subdivided into multiple districts
and a British employee who was responsible for collecting revenue and the judicial authority
was appointed in each district.

COURTS IN ADALAT SYSTEN IN ORDER OF THE HEIRARCHY

1. Small cause courts- in every Pergunnah (village) ,certain courts were present and used
for dealing with small cases. Such court’s rulings were used to be binding up to the
amount of Rs. 10. The village chief or the chief farmer of the respectively pergunnah
headed those courts.13
2. Mofussil (district courts)- these courts are divided into two parts namely mofussil
Diwani Adalat and mofussil Nizamat Adalat
Mofussil Diwani Adalat- the courts were used for the provision of income and legal
competence in each district and included marriages disputes, castes, debts, contracts,
disputed accounts, property, partnership and rent demand. In the past, it had financial
expertise of up to Rs. 500, so that this court’s decisions were final.
Mofussil Nizamat Adalat- these courts were also known as Fauzdari Adalats. In
every district, such courts existed. It dealt with criminal cases only. Cases relating to

13
Asim K. Datta, WARREN HASTINGS AND THE INTRODUCTION OF ENGLISH PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE
LAWS IN BENGAL, Vol. 37(1976), p.346.
 death sentences and forfeiture of property were not allowed to proceed because such
cases were to be submitted for final orders to Sardar Diwani Adalat. These courts
were headed only by Muslim law officers. Moulvi spoke of the law, the kazi and then
mufti give fatwa and judged accordingly.
3. Sardar (Provincial courts)- these courts were also divided into two
Sadar Diwani Adalat- It was the federal supreme tribunal for civil cases. It had the
original and appellate jurisdiction. The appeals from mofussil Diwani Adalat were
not only heard, but also cases concerning over Rs. 500 had been taken up.14
Sardar Nizamat Adalat- It was the federal supreme tribunal for criminal cases. It had
the specific jurisdiction to deal with the cases of capital punishment and forfeiture of
property.

Impeachment
The prosecution of Warren Hastings for removal(impeachment) from the position of
governor general was a voguish public affair which was prosecuted and defended by Edmund
Burke and Sir William Jones respectively.15 Edmund Burke was a member of house of
commons famous for his incisive condemnation of the French revolution.
The trial was initiated in 1787 and held till 1795 with the acquittal of governor general. For
spectators it was not merely trial, it was something sort of social event. The trial of Warren
Hastings was to bring out of the speculation of wrongdoings in Burma, not excluding the
violation of local laws. Romantic literature suggests that almost two days were spent reciting
Burke’s claim against Warren Hastings.16 These countless counts against Hastings is the
reason behind the great public interest.
During the time of verdict, a full eight years later, 180 changes taken place in the house of
Lords, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Thurlow, who opposed Warren Hastings was succeeded by
Lord Loughborough, who favoured him.17
Various allegations were that he made offices which had no link to gradation and filled them
in the way suited best to his own profits. He was charged for “high crimes and

14
Gayatri watti, EVOLUTION OF ADALAT SYSTEM IN INDIA: PRE AND POST BRITISH ERA, vol.2, July 2018.
15
Robert stone, THE TRIAL OF WARREN HASTINGS, American bar association journal, Vol. 13, no. 7(July, 1927),
pp. 399.
16
Lindsay Boynton, THE FURNITURE OF WARREN HASTINGS, vol. 112, no. 809, Burlington magazine
17
P.J. Marshall, THE PERSONAL FORTUNE OF WARRAN HASTINGS, the economic history review, new series,
vol.17 no. 2.
misdemeanours” in the house of lords. In defence he said that he was fourteen years at that
job, and there is not a single case where he was found in corruption. 18
The evidence of Lord Cornwallis, who came back from India, to replace Hastings as governor
general came as a major raise of the defence. The allegations of Hastings having destroyed
British prestige were refuted by Lord Cornwallis and remark that Hastings was invariably
famous with inhabitants.19 When he was asked about any instance where he can justify the
reason to impeach Hastings, his answer was not affirmative.
In Burke’s opinion, Warren Hastings might run away from India with the stolen things but
still he was permitted bail.
From British’s perspective, “the impeachment of Warren Hastings” was just an
ungratefulness because he was the one who guard the company’s rule in Bengal from subside
and combine the British Empire in India.
On 23 April, 1795, on almost all charges he was found not guilty. He was acquitted with
majority vote. The prosecution ravaged Hastings financially and left him with debts of 70,000
pounds.
He subsequently applied for financial help to the British government and was ultimately
rewarded by a grant of 50,000 pounds and a pension of 4000 pounds by the East India
Company. Even though all his concerns were not addressed, he was finally abled to achieve
his lifelong goal to buy Daylesford ( traditional family farm) in Gloucestershire which had
been abandoned in a past generation.

Conclusion

18
Brian smith, EDMUND BURKE, THE WARREN HASTINGS TRIAL, AND MORAL DIMENSION OF CORRUPTION,
polity, vol.40, no.1, pp. 74.
19
Mahesh Sharma, LORD CORNWALLIS AND CONSOLIDATION OF BRITISH RULE, 17 March, 2020.
Warren Hastings was the first and most prominent of the British Governors-general of India,
who influenced Indian events from 1772 to 1785. He implemented many reforms in all areas
of administration.
Warren Hastings put an end to the dual system in Bengal. This system was very favourable to
the British because the British had all the power in the reign, they did not have any of the
responsibilities or obligation.
The war of Rohillas led the conduct of warren Hastings under “sever censure” in England.
The position of district magistrate was first created in 1772 and this happened under Warren
Hastings who was then the newly appointed governor of Bengal.
The judicial administration was introduced alongside a system of revenue administration by
Warren Hastings. This led to the foundation of Adalat system in India.
Warren Hastings’ image is totally negative and controversial. He was accused of corruption
and high crimes. But ultimately, he was acquitted on account of lack of evidences against
him.