CHAPTER XIV THE PRIVY COUNCIL very important role in shaping the indian Independence, It has a a ini: mn of in . ii ion in systematising the law and eae ne feet 2 a In ia contribution in sym the more conspicuous Wher into consideration significance LE e belonging to different caste, creed and religions etc, who perere Trou sh this august institution with dispassionate interest Ay DMP. eae iy opined, ‘almost all systems of our jurisprudence and eve Benak judicial i Y tution was within the umbrella of the Privy Council. oe ut aispale was ,d upon by the Privy Council because Ey ind of to be adjudicate i be tional area raed * most one-fifth of the human population in the thence requires thorough study. The Privy Council played administration of justice Pht its jurisdic world and istori jective : ‘ eee of the institution of Privy Council is closely related to the historical developments in England for the preceding nine hundred years. The history of Privy Council dates back to the Normans who conquered England in 1066 A.D. They introduced a strong central government which handled the legislative, executive and the judicial functions of the government. A small council called the Curia Regis or King’s Court consisting of feudal Lords was formed to advise the King in administrative and legal matters. The Council met in different parts of the country at regular intervals. The Curia Regis conducted its business through two kinds of meetings : (i) meeting of the entire Curia; and (ii) meeting of the smaller Curia. The meeting of the entire Curia was arranged on three great festivals in a year i.e. Easter, Whitsun and Christmas when all the feudal chiefs and royal members met together to consider serious matters. In these meetings they also evolved new laws and Sena The King himself held this Court in person. The origin fos ° of Lords in subsequent years may be traced back to this larger body ol ae Regis, also known as Magnum Concillium. e Si i i ; — pero ra = meetings more regularly and frequently to Particularly the matters relating to nv ns day-to-day administration, This smaller meeting consisted of limited vq eee OF the Government King’s ministers and his Justiin ned HUMber of royal-officials including s Justiciar and Chancell, ; . Progress and prosperity of the countr, incellor. In course of time, with the Curia increased. Conse untry, tle pressure of work on the smaller maller body was split into sever! ‘quently, the 5 ts separately and came to be known a m2, branches to deal with iff i ferent subj King’s Council. It was an important tod 160) Scanned with CamScannerCOUNCIL: privy te 161 from Curia Regis, the King continued to exercise his residual jurisdiction ov! the Council which met as the Kin T body of advisers comrosed f officials and partly of gre, Council to try 5 cae was limited to misdei atl mean ing the Tudor's rule in Englat DE ner Couneil which mainly consisted ot the the ed itself with state matters, The cern ished its executive from the judicial fenctions, Henceforth, the isting ranch was to attend the King constantly while the Judicial Branca ecco at Westminister and Was later known as the Judicial Committee of ie eruneil The Bellis empire having acquired many colonies oven ary 17th century, it was nec ry for the King-in-Couneil to Ee vals rom these colonies. Consequently, this function w. : at rere in 1572. For this Purpose a special committee ape ! red nee mittee of the Privy Council was formed which i polite se coallte institution so far appeals from the overseas British col Highest risdic i als from the courts in ae icti ivy Council to entertain appeal u juris of the Privy per sro The ju ae was based on the Royal Prerogative of the Sore ign 7 Seren of just e. This prerogative was described | ag in Bg ie fous Es ees prerogative right of every subject of the King to Ee eS a justice, if he failed to get i In petition the Bye aa inCounell entertained appeals eo appeal Saad ing- e 3 = en it eh to the discretion the Pay rani the right of appeal oa. . i pri » the ri ore rei But with the expansion of the ET erinnnne wi ject it. ing’s subjects and the appe: ar to reject it. Bu King’s subjects and th Iso made for appeal became the privilege Seen Besides, Ponca aaa Raia am ea were moved before the Privy by special leav pe i i the tin King- un See ete Ki -Parliament and 7 jindicial In course of time, p ht before the Kin; eacietnndenl to be broug! s_ originate einen! of England came eee te el mes eCouncil. je. Privy eae : correct the errors from th Lords to functioning of the House of isdiction : il’s Jurisdic! : Haldane TEyy Coe ey Council Lord : ‘The Nature and Extent of the Pri eae of the P Hes real sense, wearea Describing tlie nature of ee not paleo In the capacity of in Hull v. Mckenna? observed, illors who are at nea judicial spirit The Fimmittee of Privy Councillar Maja aye acs Upon the Sovereign in ‘giving advice Or self and alW. ent up to the a gives the judgment implic before it is sen anace We make, Our report is made a form." avy Council was the i he Ouncil. It is delivered in a ain practice tne ny sput the ees incase of Thus it would be seen that {9 FCS and dort asa final ON °F apex court of appeal form of advice --Souncil was always in the Soe » The urs only, Nd in fifteenth century, the Curia Regis or King’s trusted advisers, ordinances of the Council of 1526 eas adjudicate ‘as entrusted causes dealt with in the courts e LRIPC 520 629). Scanned with CamScannerINDIAN LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL History 162 : + report tendering advice to his Maj tL used to be in 4 form of Tep' peal. The Report of the A i ¢ in en in case under ap] action lo be taken in the words, “Their Lordships ith # ere! iS concluded with the i ey alway’ » showing that it was a mere jesly garding the way in which it might decide the tive of justice. It was a well other courts. 1 regarding the Council wa humbly advise ‘on to the Crown F recommendatit r g eroga amen at exercise of Its Roy! Pr | matter in Tpavention thal Kiing-in-Counel always accepted the report ofthe joel Com King ound, The report has be unanimous ss cial Committee Of the Pri for dissenting opinions of the members. el ne nature, extent and importance of the jurisdiction of the oo a sppeals and petitions fom colonies, Lord Brougham in his celebrated speech on Law Reforms in 1828, observed that the Privy Councillors “determine not only the questions of colonial Law plantation cases but also sit as the Judges in the last resort of all prize causes. And they hear and decide upon all our plantation appeals... All this immense jurisdiction over the rights of property h al anc Tegal, and over all the question i tof so vast and varied a province, is exercised by the Privy Counc red and alone. It is obvious from the mere ariety of matters arising in them, distance of those coloni n the foreign to our habits and beyond the scope of our knowledge, any judicial tribunal in this country must of necessity be an extremely inadequate Court of Review. The greatest difficulty in addition wos that different colonies had i eferent law.” Mentioning about India, Lord Brougham pointed out that, these variations are still greater since while one territory is swayed by the Mohammedan law, another is tuled by Hindu law and this again, in some of our possessions is qualified and superseded by the law of Buddha, the English jurisprudence being confined to the handful of British settlers and to inhabitants of three Presidencies.”? In view of the inability of the Privy Council to cope up with these multifarious problems, Lord Brougham who was himself the Lord Chancellor in 1830, introduced a Bill on the constitution of the Privy Council. Consequently, et ‘Por better Administration of Justice in His Majesty’s Privy Council! ws" passed on August 14, 1833 in England whereby a Judicial ‘Cominittee of Privy Council consisting of President Lord Chancellor Land other Privy Councillors holding high judicial offices was formed. As stated earlier, the Judicial Committee, in fact did not deliver jud b ised ing in judicial matters who acted on its rey a aa os only a bee ee vitect to any advice given by the Co = eT bi issued orders in Council to 8" Composition of the Judicial Committee of Privy Council : aa Permancot Judicial Committee af Peivy Counell was set up unde ite meniary Rei i - The Committee composed of the President of Privy Council, Lord Hig Chancellor, and such other members of the PY a tee to time held any of the following offices, namely, The ee Lord Commissioner of the Great Seal of Great Britain- .__ Chief Justice or the Judge of the King’s Bench Court. 1. Lord Brougham’s Speeches, Vol. Il p. 356, Judi there was no scope xp the rhe Scanned with CamScanner)UNCIL, en \ 163 Master of Rolls. Vice Chancellor of England. Chief Justice or the Judge of the Cor ni Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, a * judge of Prerogative Court of Lord Arch Bi es of the High Court of ‘Admitaltys an ae . Chief Judge os the Coutts of Bankruptcy etc. ddition, the King could also provi a —_— x ers ve the Judicial eee oe a Privy Councillors, to be mere Act strengthened the legal clement in the se rentals Fey Council. The quorum was fixed at four. wom ne Sanenne Beil who held judicial offices in India or any of the Domini ey vated as Assessors without right to vote on a salary of £ 100 pe aed spe ire appellate jurisdiction of the King-in-Council Was to be exercised by fe Jadicial Committee of the Privy Council. Thus, under the Act of 1835, the Gal Committee of the Privy Council was constituted as, “an effective Court appeal wit provision for inclusion of members with experience of overseas jaispradence.”' The Privy Council also granted special leave to appeal in civil matters involving a substantial question of law. All appeals and petitions were referred by the King-in-Council to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Judicial Committee was to hold its proceedings in open court and report its findings and recommendations to the Crtwn. The decision of the Judicial Committee was not in the form of judgment but was a sort of recommendation made to the King suggesting as to what was proper to be done on the principles of justice in the given case and it was acted tn by the King in full Privy Council. The King always accepted the report of the Judicial Committee and delivered judgment accordingly. Appeals to Privy Council : In the case of Fryer v. Bernard? the Privy Council held that appeals from overseas Dominions could lie only to the King-in-Council. Thus from the British possessions beyond seas, petitions seeking, justice could go and continued {0 go to the King-in-Council which functioned as a court of last resort and as an ultimate court of appeals from such territories. As the oventh colonies of England increased and developed from 17th century onwards, the Privy Council's judicial function assumed more and more importance. As the underlying idea in submitting appeals to the Privy Council was to redress the Unjust administration of law and justice, and it being an appeal to the sovereign as the fountain head of justice for protection, the appeal was in the form of a Petition to be considered only as a matter of grace. ‘Therefore, it was within the discretion dered only as a malier © refuse leave to appeal But with cretion of the King-in-Council 10 BreP es by the Parliament allowing Sowing Empire a ‘tment of various $| ‘eas to the ‘Kee Counc of var yarious courts in the settlement unde ‘Rtlain circumstances, the petitionary appeal ripened into a privilese for the King's subjects.2 Appeals made under Pin statutory provisions came (0 °C Keith 2 eae Constitutional History of India, p: 155: vi ‘Council Practice (1912) p. 6 3 Tai AAP Outings of fan Legal History, p-362-88 (196) Canterbury. SERA S Scanned with CamScannerINDIAN LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL Histo, | YY 164 ” this did not exhaust th j ght”. But | © Roy “ as of Right! j] still entertained aj yal known as ApPrey and Kingsin- Coun cumstances eae to rerogative COMPITY Fy, even though t ane atticula: i ih spect Peat ihe requirements expressly made in respects of appt lf railed as “appeals by special leave”, fication of appeals according to the sy wo broad categories, namely, () civ nol peal did appeal id not as of right” From the point of matter, they could be (ii) criminal. jvil matters could be made with or without special lev (i)_ Appeals in O° ncil. Appeals without leave were regulated by order i, of the Privy im nerial Act of local Act. Special leave could only 5, Counc by the brivy Council, if in its opinion some important point ae ‘volved, unless it was restrained by some statute to do so, «a)_enminal eases, an appeal could be allowed by Crown in exercise g i (ii) Tn cin Gs if advised by Judicial Committee. Such cases were | pir anal few to be used exceptionally where : appeals were view of class classified into t bie | ang (a) there had been violation of principles of natural justice, (b) violation of rules of procedure, " (c) substantial and grave injustice was caused to the appellant in any manner. Special leave to appeal could be granted by the Judicial Committee in cases where the law had been interpreted in such a manner so as to create a bad precedent for future and no other course except granting of special leave and intervention by the Crown, could prevent the consequences thereof. Appeals from India : Appeals from the courts in India, ie. the Crown’s Courts and, the Company's Courts lay to Privy Council as of right. These appeals may be discussed under the following heads Priv CPPeals from Mayor’s Courts of 1726.—Appellate jurisdiction of the Ba Connell was made available for the first time to Indians by the Charter i by sich Mayor's Courts were established in three Presidencies of ct series appeal from the Mayor's Court lay to the Governor and Council ee ee decisions of the Governor and Council were to be final it involving mig iter Werte upto 1,000 pagodas in value. In other cases the Governor and Counel Ia. a 1000 pagodas, a further appl om Y to the King-in-Council, within a period which the judgment appealed against Ww" t j | fourt fourteen days from the date on 2. Appeals fro | a | Regulating Act, 1773, spouPteme Court of Caleutta (Fort William) une | 1775, made provision for Sup oe tin& Act 1773 and the Judicial Chart ; t. The Erna Courts at three Presidencies in place ‘peal from i Started functioning in Fort William fro™ in Council provi cision of the Sy 8 King: More. Appeal red the subject-matter jn prem’ Court could be taken to King-n-Couneil tt i dispute was worth 1000 pagodas far Council in civil caves wee le beraande way of Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was Scanned with CamScannerTHE PRIVY COUNCIL directed not to allow any such appeal unless the petition for that purpose was preferred before it within six months from the date of pronouncing the judgment.! However, in criminal matters, the Supreme Court was to have full and absolute power and authority to allow or deny permission to make an appeal to the Privy Council. The Supreme Court was given full powers to decide the merits of the cases which justified grant of leave to appeals. Thus in criminal cases, the Supreme Court had the discretion to allow or not to allow an appeal to the Privy Council. 3. Appeals from the Recorder’s Court under the Act of 1797—The Mayor's Courts at Madras and Bombay gave place to the Recorder’s Courts in 1797 in which the provisions analogous to those prevailing at Calcutta were made applicable. In 1800, a Supreme Court was established at Madras in place of Recorder's Court with provisions of appeal to the Privy Council (King-i Council) similar to those of the Supreme Court at Calcutta. Likewise, when a Supreme Court was established at Bombay in 1823, similar appellate provisions with the only difference that the pecuniary limitation for appeal was Rs. 3000/- instead of 1000 pagodas, were made applicable. The King-in- Council had a right to refvse or admit the appeal or correct or vary such decision at its pleasure. 4. Appeals to Privy Council from Sadar Adalats.—Before 1781 i.e. the Act of Settlement, there was no provision for appeals to the King-in-Council from Sadar Adalats in Bengal which were established to hear appeals from the mofussils. The Act of Settlement 1781, however, enhanced the status of the Sadar Diwani Adalat by constituting it into a Court of Record and conferred it a right of appeal from its decisions to King-in-Council in such civil matters which involved subject-matter valuing £ 5000 or more. No rules were prescribed to regulate such appeals by the Act except for prescribing the aforesaid pecuniary limit. It was only in 1797 that Regulation XVI laid down that the petition of appeal had to be presented tu the Sadar Diwani Adalat within six months of the date of delivery of judgment appealed against. It was also clarified that the subject-matter had to be £ 5000 or more, exclusive of the cost of the suit. . 5, Appeal from Sadar Diwani Adalats of Madras and Bombay.—A Sadar Diwani Adalat was established at Madras in 1802. In an appeal from its decision in civil matters involving subject-matter valuing Rs. 45,000/- and upwards lay to the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta. But by an Act of 1818, the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta relinquished the authority to hear appeals from the Sadar Diwani Adalat of Madras and now an appeal from the Madras Sadar Diwani Adalat lay a 12 the ea ee ti Jable amount. "1 Is there was no restriction as to the OPPO ken to the Privy Cannel eveaiin iwani Adalat ae he Nas ee a tter was less than £ 5000. cases where the value of the subject-mal Privy Council was allowed as early as Jo Bombay; right 10 APM an extended to civil cases of the value of . 1812 under a Regulation of that year. 1 ‘Section 18 of the Regulating Act 1773. Regulation VII of 1818. Scanned with CamScanneroR Onr re RD Oereree cere reece ae eae cranes ieee eee £5000 or more. However, the restriction of monetary value was withdrawn by Regulation V of the Bombay Code of 1818. In 1827, Elphinstone Code came into existence which contained almost similar provisions of appeal to the Privy Council as v in force, the most striking feature of which was absence of any pecuniary limit for moving, an appeal Fate of Early Appeals : 1 The earliest appeal to the Privy Council was, Andrew Hunter v. Raja of Burdwan," from the Sadar Diwani Adalat of Calcutta, decided by the Privy Council in 1798, affirming the decision of the Sadar Diwani Adalat. Until 1823, there were fourteen appeals from Sadar Diwani Adalats to Privy Council including eleven from Calcutta, one from Madras and two from Bombay. To start with, the litigants could not make much use of the provisions of appellate jurisdiction of Privy Council because of their ignorance of the sieps to be taken to bring the appeals from hearing before the Privy Council. The suitors as well as the lawyers in the Company's Adalats were not familiar with the mode, manner and procedure of conducting appeals in England. The litigants of interior mufassils had little contact with Englishmen and hence they were ignorant about the court procedure. A solicitor in England had to be appointed to represent the case of the litigant in the Privy Council and the Attorney of the Supreme Court only acted as a liaison between the appellant and the solicitor. After filing an appeal to the Privy Council, the parties waited eagerly for the decision to come from the King-in-Council, bu: it never came as certain steps had to be taken by the parties before the case could be taken by the Privy Council in the King-in-Council and in the absence of those steps, the appeal would either be dismissed for non-prosecution or consigned to the record office. This caused a lot of disappointment to the litigants and the disputed property was almost ruined. Thus the ignorance of the litigants about the exact procedure to be following during the course of appeal to be taken to the Privy Council caused them more harm than good. It was in 1826 that Alexander Johnston, brought it to the notice of the Company’s Board of Directors that many appeals involving important questions of law had been pending before the Privy Council for a number of years. These cases had not been heard because the parties concerned had not taken necessary steps in England to pursue these appeals. The Privy Council, therefore, impressed upon the Board of Control of the Company to initiate steps to inform the parties in India about the pendency of their proceedings in these appeals and appraise them of the necessary procedure to be followed to bring their cases to a hearing, it was suggested that a Registrar of appeals be appointed to undertake the cases of respondents where the appellants had appointed agents but the respondents had not done so. Where neither of the two appointed an agent, the Registrar could act for both the parties. The Company on its part, hesitated to appoint agents on behalf of the parties for the fear whether it would be able to recover from the parties, the ci st which it might incur in bringing the appeals to a hearing. The Company, 1. (0798) PC 2 Vol. 1by pp, 135-136. 2. Five of these eleven appeals were dismi:¢ed by the Privy Council for non-prosecution. 3." in, MP. : Outlines of Indian Legal History p. 450. Scanned with CamScanner167 i esired that proper regulation be promul; ated layi i we in which partic concerned failed to Repent by Pea to a 2885 hem would be d posed of and the Company would be reimbursed by C parties concerned the expe incurred by it on prosecuting the pending ales a rest of this on ‘Act! was passed by the Parliament in 1633 appeals hg the constitution of the Privy crrnil vehich now functioned as a rittp dispose of appeals and petitions from overseas fanent institul colonies: , ‘The Judicial Committee specially dealt with the appeals from the Indian rts which were pending, before the Privy Council. It passed the following ers to expedite the disposal of pending appeals. ‘By its frst order of 1833, the Company was directed to bring before the 1 Committee of the Privy Council, all the cases of appeals from its In all forty-three such appeals were pending at the hnteen cases from Bengal, ten from Madras and fiftee judicial eaar Diwani Adatats- time which included cig] from Bombay Sadar Adalats. By the second order of November 18, 1833, the Company was required to appoint solicitors or agents to act as counsels for different parties whose Is were pending before the Privy Council. By the third order, the Company was authorised to recover costs from the appellants incurred by it in bringing appeals through agents in the Privy Council. Since there was no uniformity regarding pecuniary limits of appeals from different Indian Courts, the Privy Council by an order of 1838 provided that ‘fter December 31,1838 no appeal should be allowed, by any Sadar Diwani ‘Adalat or Supreme Court of India, unless the petition was presented within six months from the date of judgment, decree or order and the value of the subject- matter in dispute in such appeal was at least Rs. 10,000/-. The order also provided for appeals by special leave in exceptional cases. The constitution of the Judicial Committee was modified in 1843 when the quorum to decide appeals from Indian Courts was reduced from 4 to3 members. ‘The Judicature Act, 1845 + 1s in Council the Company brought ‘According to the aforesaid three ordel rat all 67 appeals were disposed of, out of the pending appeals for dispar’ whith 37 were affirmed, 12 Poversed, 1 varied, 14 compounded, 2 withdrawn pnd 1 was remitted. The COMPARY sect go spencl a sum of 151537 pounds on these appeals, of which only @ nominal part could be recovered from the parties. Therefore, the British aeliament passed an Act in 1845 seeking to absolve the Company of its responsibilities of appeals. The Act laid down that the provisions of 1833 Pid not be applied to any appeal from any Sadar Diwani Raalat after January 1 1846 and such appeals were to be managed by the parties themselves. Tub sei dot January 1846, the management of appeals in England was taken out oF Company's hands and was vested in the parties themselves ee ee Te a fia Fourth was passed in 1093 for better administration of Justice in His Scanned with CamScannerINDIAN LEGAL & CONSTITUTIONAL, Histopy * from the Indian High Courts : of the Indian High Courts a 1861, the Supreme Sadar Adalats in Calcutta, Bombay and Ma J28 were abolishes aot aE ee i right Courle WEES ablished in these Presidene ae eee eens Adio ihe Privy Caurll inany Case nok being of actiminy An appeal could be Samal judgment, decree or order of the High Court if the jurisdiction from any natler was not less than rupees ten thousand or the fyi fh | Conidae ees appeal could lie to the Privy Council from 4, ees High Courl made in exercise of ts original jursarn) aay cass ati afpolat af la ad Been naarved (or the Opinion of the SENG ca Cece a jurisdiction provided the High cat High Court by cout exercising orignal juradtion ited certifies that the case is fit one for appeal to y i ve to Appeal : i eee cae cee Regulations also reserved to the Sovereign, namely, Kingrin-Council, power to grant special leave to appeal in those cases which did not qualify to come before it ‘as of right’ under stipulated conditions, It could grant special leave to appeal even where the High Court refused to grant Recessary certificate or leave. Special leave could be granted in civil as well as criminal cases. Appeals to Privy Council Consequent to the passing importance or of a substantial character.4 In criminal cases, the approach of the Privy Council was more restrictive and it intervend only when there had been Stross miscarriage of justice and the Fecteial legal principles had been violated? The obvious reason for this restrictive approach of the Privy Council in criminal appeals was that such | pbpeals were time consuming and therefore would have resulted in the Postponement of sentences or execution thereof passed on those found guilty of spnvicts in suspense. Yet another reas, in colonies. Subsequently, Sections 109 Wappess frm ge 2 ro ie Civil Procedure ‘Code, 1908 contained Provision relating Cas 10; Geng 928 contained these provisions. is : | Gletgue v. Murray, (1 1; Jivangiri Guru (1926) 50 Bom, 573; Motichana’ Ce aeet: prey Ras Sing v. King ot ‘ - 306 (4th ed), TAC a0, 6 emperor, 4tIA 137, Scanned with CamScanner\CIL paivv COUN 169 ce has been done. . There ieee case, deprives the accused o| potion of law." oferting to its prerogative to grant . are ming cases? of appeal from the Strom leave to appeal, the Privy cone lee coe ogc ek to the Prit uuncil only if the aC cad 8 Wertificate of permission? ite Supreme Court concerned gave the Kamar, the Supreme Court of Calcutta ha rps that even in the case of to the Privy Council ad refused to grant leave to tn 1862, the Privy Council considered q i agp itself from the Sadar Nizamat Aun clo eae jeeS On being convicted on a charge of iene Gee eave to appeal which was refused by the Sadar Nizamat ‘Adalat Cee n while eee the existence of Prerogative of the Crown to grant special Saree apes aT ere that justice had not been well ‘ministered in this case, still refused special leave on three mai id namely, @ it would involve investigation and examination of the entire evidence in the case de novo: (ii) till that time there was no precedent to grant leave nor had any petition praying for special leave ever come from any Dominion or colonies; (ii) the consequences of granting special leave would be destructive of administration of criminal justice. The Privy Council, however, hoped that justice would be done in the instant case by exercising the Royal prerogative of granting pardon to the must be somet A the substance eft Im the @ of fair trial or the Nand In Re Dillet® case the Privy Council reiterated its earlier stand on grant of special leave in criminal cases and observed that invariably it would desist from reviewing or interfering with the course of criminal proceedings unless it is shown that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice or some substantial and grave injustice has been caused to the petitioner. Pethape, the first case from India, in which the Privy Council intervened was in 1913 because the accused in this case was condemned to death upon no evidence at all. The Privy Council in Arnold v. Kin, Emperor® through Lord Shaw dbserved that the Judicial Committee of Privy Council is not a court of criminal Appeal. It shall not interfere with the course of criminal [ayy unless there has been gross violation of the natural principles of justice so demonstratively manifest as to conviner their Lordships, that the result arrived at was opposite 10 the result which their lordships would themselves have reached. 1914 AC 549, 296513 Bek PAullee Byramjee, 5 Moo, PC 276 13 ER 496 and Res ‘y-Aloo Raroo, 5 Moo PC 296: 504. Queen, 4 Moo PC 239 ete - Nga Hoong p. The Queen, 7 MIA 72; Aga Kurboolie Mohd © Keith A Constitutional History of India p: 77- ‘Moo PC (NS) 273 (1872) ; 15 ER 704. " (1887) 12 AC 459; also see Reg. v. Bertrand, LR1,PC529. _ Vaithnatha Pillai o. King Emperor, 401A 193 (1973) (914) ac 644. pupae one Scanned with CamScanne170 INDIAN LEGAL & CUNO eee Appeal from the Federal Court : ‘A Federal Court was established in India by the Government of India Act, 1935. An appeal from the decision of the Federal Court could be allowed to the Privy Council in the exercise of its original jurisdiction without leave, and in any other case, by leave of the Federal Court, or His Majesty's Council, namely the Privy Council.! It must be stated that even after the establishment of the Federal Court, the old system of appeal from High Court to Privy Council was continued and uninterrupted. Abolition of the Jurisdiction of the Privy Council : Consequent to the Indian Independence in 1947, there was need to extend the jurisdiction of the Federal Court by restricting Privy Council's jurisdiction over it. Therefore, an Act called the Federal Court (Enlargement of Jurisdiction) Act, 1948 was passed which provided that an appeal would be allowed to the Federal Court from any judgment of the High Court without leave of the Federal Court if an appeal could have been brought to His Majesty’s Council without any special leave under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure or of any other law in force, and with the special leave of the Federal Court in other cases. The jurisdiction of the Privy Council to hear appeals from India was finally abolished in 1949 by the Abolition of the Privy Council Jurisdiction Act, 1949 which came into force on October 10, 1949. The pending appeals were transferred to the Federal Court except those which the Privy Council could dispose of before the inauguration of the Indian Constitution. With the coming into force of the Constitution of India on January 26, 1950, the Federal Court was replaced by the Supreme Court of India. It is now the highest court for the country and was conferred wide jurisdiction. _The last Indian case decided by the Privy Council was that of Krishnaswami Ayyangar v. Perumal Goundan,2 from Madras which ae decided on December 15, 1949. Thus came to an i i , . end Py ¥ centuries old relationship with India. 2 Soe es Role of Privy Council in the Development of law in India: ___ The Privy Council played a very significant role i j wna Gare 9 tect ene devon ti the English legal systems over which legal ideas travelled from England to. India” It helped inthe development ofthe fine principles of commen ln : India which provided basis for codification of Indian laws, The Privy Covel also acted asa connecting link between the vatious Sadar Adalat oe Sonne and High Courts in India which followed and Gee Judie) carers,one another and thus served as a great unifin pee ne aaa guministration in India The decisions cf the tee Sores ik the ie rine of nat fe sah Nae aay id opel the ral justine Iways tried to uphold jureprudence. 1s cortbution cit ta eet ae realm of cial 1. ti iz 2 AIR DSOSC ICS, an MW Of India Act, 1935, oy ns peteanel laws anc 3. Jain, MP. Oualine of Indian Legal History p. 477 (1966), Sao ape eT I Scanned with CamScanneruerny COUNCIL ane ercial law is also no less import . comfporating in them the fine principles of een speaking about the contribution of Py Shri K.M. Munshi at the eve of th f ne “The British Parliament and the jeutien of the obsjrtions which the Anglo-Saxon race hove goa gennell insincil, during the last few centuries has aa is mankind. The Privy jnated the concept of rights and obligations throughaut oh ae eu Colonies in the British Commonwealth. It has beeen ee 24 for us Indians, it became the instrument and embodinn eae ne ore ane neept on which alone we have based our democratic nsbutions which ne pave set up in our Constitution.”! atic institutions which we ‘The Privy Council assumed the role of the sole i Constitution under the Government of India rogers a ih has played a commendable role in moulding the Constitution, remote fromthe jocal political background. : jt must be stated that even after the establishment of the Supreme Court of india on January 26, 1950, the decisions of the Privy Council are held in great jateem as is evident from the fact they are still binding on all the High Courts Sfindia unless overruled by the Supreme Court of India. Despite the contribution of the Privy Council to the development of law and legal institutions in India, its judgments have sometimes been criticised for pot being in consonance with the accepted Indian norms. This was particularly true with its decisions relation to personal laws of Hindus and Mohammedans. Since the members of the Privy Council were all English Judges, they had little inowledge about the manners, customs and traditions of the Indian natives Moreover, the solicitors in England were engaged by the Attorneys of the Indian Supreme Courts. These solicitors, again being ignorant about the Indian ways of life, lacked adequate knowledge about the habits and practices of the to plead the cause of their natives, therefore, they were not in a position dients successfully. : : Mathes choricoming of the functioning of the Privy Counc from England was the huge expenditure which the incoe in oe eal appeal to the Privy Council. As a Sle icity parties could resort to this course 0} P deprived of this opportunity due ie finan aa ~_ That apart, the Priv: Council was the i sole dependence system. It being tae yy Enigand, gave an impression OF oa itl Sane n the Britishers in matters of law and justice. But there fren vie Privy Council inthis argument keeping in view the high taller vt and unflinching has evolved through its attitude of judicial detachmen' 2 conscientious integrity that subordinated everything 10 ject but also - Tegard for the rights and justice not only b “fearless between State and subjects. The supremacy “Just d to ration, ‘ationalise these laws bi lity, Justice and good conscience. Privy Council to the Indian legal Privy Council are two great ¢ Dominions parties had to esult of this, f justice and the jal constraints. ee Test court in the Indian judicial teen subject and subje er Privy Council lay in its i Me 477. Quote fis Be ee Outlines of Indian Lega! History P Scanned with CamScanner