THAKUR RAMNARAYAN COLLEGE OF LAW

RESEARCH PAPER

NAME: EKTA TRIPATHI

CLASS: SYBLS(SEM-III)

DIVISION/ROLL NO.: B/48

SUBJECT: HISTORY OF COURTS

TOPIC: THE REGULATING ACT OF 1773

SUBMITTED TO: PROFESSOR JOSHITA LAMBA

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 19/12/2022

 THE REGULATING ACT OF 1773

ABSTRACT:
The British Parliament passed the Regulating Act of 1773 to control the territories
of the East India Company majorly in Bengal. This act was passed due to the
misgovernance by the British East India government, introduced a situation of
bankruptcy and the government had to interfere with the affairs of the Company.
The Regulating Act was passed in the British Parliament in June 1773. It was the
first parliamentary ratification and authorization defining the powers and authority
of the East India Company with respect to its Indian possessions.

INTRODUCTION:
The company’s officials were accused of fostering a culture of corruption and
nepotism. Robert Clive established a Dual method of administration that received a
lot of flak. According to the Dual form, the Nawabs had Nizamat rights while the
Company held Diwani rights. Each was given to the Company. The company’s
primary goal was to boost revenue, which resulted in an increase in the misery of
farmers and ordinary people.
The British Parliament passed the Regulating Act of 1773 to regulate the East India
Company’s holdings, primarily Bengal. In 1772, the East India Company,
experiencing a dire financial crisis, applied for a loan from the British government.
Adam Smith’s free trade ideas were gradually influencing the British, who hated
the Company’s monopolistic monopoly over commerce with India. Therefore, the
Parliament decided that it was necessary to pass the Regulating Act of 1773. The
British Parliament and Governor General Warren Hastings created the Regulating
Act of 1773. The Act’s principal goal was to take control of the East India
Company’s lands. It was the first consensus establishing the Company’s authority.
OBJECTIVES OF THE REGULATING ACT:
● To control and regulate the affairs of the East India Company.
● To remove the political power from the hands of the trading Company.
● To recognize the political and administrative power of the Company.
● To provide new administrative reforms which were to provide a Central
Administration System.
● To improve the despotic state of affairs(situation) of the Company.
● To sort out the chaos created by the introduction of the system of dual
government.
● To bring anti-corruption practices via the medium of the act by prohibiting
the servants of the company, from engaging in any form of private trade.

PROVISIONS OF THE REGULATING ACT:

● This act permitted the Company to retain its territorial possessions in India
but sought to regulate the activities and functioning of the company. It did
not take over power completely, hence called ‘regulating’.
● The act provided for the appointment of a Governor-General along with four
Councillors in the Presidency of Fort William (Calcutta), jointly called the
Governor-General in Council.
● As per this, Warren Hastings was appointed as the Governor-General of
the Presidency of Fort William.1
● The Governors in Councils at Madras and Bombay were brought under the
control of Bengal, especially in matters of foreign policy. Now, they could
not wage war against Indian states without Bengal’s approval.
● The company directors were elected for a period of five years and one-fourth
of them were to retire every year. Also, they could not be re-elected.

1 https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-notes-regulating-act-1773/
 ● The company directors were directed to make public all correspondence on
revenue, civil and military matters with Indian authorities before the British
authorities.
● A Supreme Court of Judicature was established at Calcutta with Sir Elijah
Impey as the first Chief Justice. Judges were to come from England. It had
civil and criminal jurisdiction over the British subjects and not over Indian
natives.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT AT CALCUTTA UNDER

THE CHARTER OF 1774:
The Regulation Act of 1773 gave the British Crown the authority to establish a
Supreme court at Calcutta through the issuance of a Charter. On 26th March 1774
King George I granted a Charter of justice to the company for the establishment of
The Supreme Court of Judicature at Calcutta. The powers of the 1774 charter
superseded the powers of the 1753 Charter thus bringing about the abolishment of
the Mayor’s court in Calcutta.
This was the first attempt made by the Crown to bring about an independent and
separate judiciary system in India.
The Supreme Court was composed of a Chief justice and three Puisne judges
(regular judges). The member of the Supreme Court had to be a barrister in Law
for not less than five years standing. The Charter also made provisions for the
appointment and removal of judges as well as for the jurisdiction, powers, and
functions of the Regulation act of 1773. The first Chief justice of the Supreme
Court was Sir Elijah Impey and the first puisne judges of the Supreme Court were
Robert Chambers, Stephen Caesar Lemaitre, and John Hyde who were appointed
by the king. The Supreme Court was like the Court of Record; it had civil,
criminal, admiralty, and Ecclesiastes jurisdiction. The Supreme Court was a court
of equity; it had the authority to administer justice but it had to function in the
same manner as the High Court of Chancery in Great Britain. The Supreme Court
also had the power to regulate and make rules for its proceedings and the
modification, approval, and rejection of these rules was done by the King-in-
Council.
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT UNDER THE CHARTER
OF 1774:

Civil jurisdiction:The Supreme Court had civil jurisdiction in civil matters

relating to the East India Company, the Mayor, and the Aldermen of Calcutta.
While in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa matters related to his Majesty’s subjects and
British subjects fell under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme
Court also had jurisdiction over all persons who were directly or indirectly
employed by the company and the subjects of his Majesty. The Supreme Court
also had jurisdiction in cases where the person residing in India, the inhabitant of
Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, if they signed or made a contract with his Majesty’s
subjects but the amount of the cause of action involved must be exceeding Rs. 500.

Criminal jurisdiction: In the town of Calcutta, Factory and factories subordinate

to Fort Williams the Supreme Court was made the Court of Oyer, Termination and
Gaol delivery where it could hear cases of treason, murder, felonies, trespass, and
other crimes and misdemeanors. The Supreme Court didn’t have any jurisdiction
over residents inhabiting the regions Calcutta, Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa but it was
empowered to hear and judge all crimes, misdemeanors, or oppressions committed
by the subjects, servants of His Majesty residing in these provinces. The Supreme
Court did not have any jurisdiction to hear matters of the Governor and Council
unless in classes of treason and felony. The Supreme Court also had the power to
suspend the executive capital punishment and send it for recommendation to the
British Council. The Governor and Council and the Supreme Court had immunity
against being arrested except in the cases of treason and felony.

Ecclesiastical jurisdiction: The Supreme Court had ecclesiastical jurisdiction

over British subjects residing in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. It had to apply
ecclesiastical law prevailing in the Diocese of London.2

Admiralty jurisdiction: The Supreme Court was a court of admiralty for the
regions of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. Its jurisdiction was the same as the Courts of
Admirable in England. It could hear all cases relating to civil and maritime crimes
and crimes committed on the high seas and offshores of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.

Equity jurisdiction: The Supreme Court was a court of equity; it was conferred
with full responsibility to administer justice quickly and arbitrarily according to the
rules and proceedings of the English High Court of Chancery. Similar to the Court
of Chancery in England the Supreme Court also had the authority to listen to cases
without being bound by the technicalities of law and could administer justice by
principles of justice, equity, and good conscience.

APPEALS:

● CIVIL CASES: Under Civil cases appeals could be filed from the Supreme
Court to the King-In-Council with permission of the Supreme Court for
subject matters in dispute exceeding the monetary value of 1000 Pagodas.
The petition seeking permission must be filed within 6 months after the
delivery of the judgment.
● CRIMINAL CASES: Under criminal cases appeals can be heard from the
Supreme Court to the King-In-Council with the permission of the

2 https://www.gktoday.in/topic/regulating-act-1773_25/
 Supreme Court but the Supreme Court also has complete authority to
reject or accept permission for such appeals.
● King-In-Council also had absolute discretion to admit or refuse any
appeal from the Supreme Court.

IMPORTANCE OF THE REGULATING ACT: The Act of 1773 recognized

the political functions of the company because it asserted for the first time the right
of the parliament to dictate the form of government. It was the first attempt of the
British government to centralize the administrative machinery in India. The act set
up a written constitution for British possession in India in place of the arbitrary
rule of the company. A system was introduced to prevent the Governor-General
from becoming autocratic. In matters of foreign policy, the Regulating Act of 1773
made the presidencies of Bombay and Madras, subordinate to the Governor
General and his council. Now, no other presidency could give orders for
commencing hostilities with the Indian Princes, declare war or negotiate a treaty. It
established a Supreme Court at Fort William Calcutta, and India’s modern
Constitutional History began.

DEFECTS OF THE REGULATING ACT:

“The object of the regulating act was good, but the system that it established was
imperfect. Firstly, the act rendered the Governor General powerless before his
colleagues because he had no veto power. This brought difficult times for Warren
Hastings. He was outvoted and overruled most of the time by the members of his
council. Further, some of the members were hostile towards Warren Hastings.
Secondly, the provisions regarding the Supreme Court at Fort Williams were
vague and defective. The law did not mention anything regarding the jurisdiction
of the Supreme Court. It also did not demarcate the lines between the powers of the
Governor and the Supreme Court. The actions of the servants of the company were
brought under the Supreme Court but this again tussle between Governor General
and the court. Thirdly, the presidencies of Bombay and Madras continued to act
on their discretion on the pretext of emergencies. They also continued wars and
alliances without caring in the least bit about the Presidency of Bengal. Fourthly,
the parliamentary control was ineffective in the sense that there were no concrete
arrangements to study and scrutinized the reports sent by Governor General in the
council. Lastly, there was nothing in the act that could address the people of
India, who were paying revenue to the company but now were dying of starvation
in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.”
Regulating Act of 1773. (2022, October 2). In Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulating_Act_of_1773

CASE STUDY RELATED TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE

SUPREME COURT AT CALCUTTA:

THE TRAIL OF RAJA NANDKUMAR:

First-person of India to get executed by hanging-Raja Nand Kumar brought
several charges against then Governor-General Warren Hastings. The charges were
related to the offenses of bribery and corruption, after which he himself was
accused and convicted of forgery and became the first person of India to be
executed by hanging.
Facts of the Case-
● At Warren Hastings and his favorite council member Barnwell’s instance,
Raja Nand Kumar, Fawkes, and Radhacharan were arrested. Both of them
clearly declared their intention before the Supreme Court judges to
prosecute all three persons for conspiracy.
● Hastings wanted to take revenge from Raja Nand Kumar in furtherance of
which he demanded Mohan Prasad to humiliate Nandkumar by filing a
 case of forgery against him. The charges of forgery against him were in
connection to a deed or bond which was executed by Raja Nand Kumar in
1765 and was claimed as an acclamation and ratification of a debt from a
banker, Bulaki Das. The judgment was reserved for Nand Kumar whereas
Fawkes was fined.
● The trial against Raja Nand Kumar for forgery and conspiracy ran
concurrently. Warren Hastings anticipated that involving Nand Kumar
directly in any way possible as far as charges for the conspiracy were
concerned, would be laboriously difficult, so he implicated and
scapegoated Raja Nand Kumar in another case of forgery.

What happened during the trial:-The trial went on continuously for eight days
without any adjournment, starting from 8th June and ending at the midnight of
15th June 1775. From 8 am every day till late night, they used to probe and
contemplate the evidence on behalf of the prosecution, and witnesses used to be
cross-examined till late at night.

Meanwhile, a plea was filed according to which the King’s Counsel was not
proficient in doing the cross-examination of witnesses fastidiously. After this, the
defense witnesses were critically and exhaustively cross-examined by the judges.
This raised questions on the probity and righteousness of the judges.

Issues raised-

1. Whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear the matter in

the first place?
The question raised was whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear the
matter in the first place. Raja Nand Kumar’s advocate advanced a plea relating to
this matter in front of the Supreme Court at the beginning of the trial but it was
rejected. But in actuality, it is observed that the offense was committed before the
Regulating Act 1773 came into force and subsequently, before the establishment of
the Supreme Court. Before this establishment, the Indians residing in Bengal were
tried by local Faujdari Adalats. Thus, the Court had no prima facie jurisdiction to
decide on the matter.

2. Whether the English Act of 1729, according to which forgery was a

capital offense, was applicable to India?

Under the English Act of 1729, the offense of forgery attracted capital punishment.
Questions were raised on the applicability of this Act to India and there was a
divided opinion even among the sitting judges at that time but ultimately, the view
of the majority of the judges along with that of Chief Justice Impey prevailed.

Steps that were taken to save Raja Nand Kumar:

● Raja Nand Kumar’s advocate forwarded an appeal to the King-in-

Council. He also filed a petition in the court for holding the verdict till the
time the Council’s decision was not established but it was rejected by the
court.
● Efforts to seek the aid and support of the members of rebuffed also did
not help.
● The letter of suggestion from the Nawab to the Council to defer the
sentence till His Majesty’s pleasure was known proved to be nugatory as
 well because the Supreme Court took no cognizant undertaking on it after
it was delivered by the Council.

The final decision of the court:-The matter was summarized on the morning of
16th June 1775 by Chief Justice Impey. Raja Nand Kumar was held unanimously
“guilty” by judges and the jury also gave the same verdict. He was incarcerated to
death by the Chief Justice under the English Act of 1729 of the British Parliament.
The then Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the ‘conspiracy case’ as they did not
have any evidence against Raja Nand Kumar. Therefore, he was hanged on August
5, 1775.

Why is the trial called the judicial murder of Raja Nand Kumar?

The trial startled and dismayed the moral scruples of mankind and was termed
widely as the “judicial murder” of Raja Nand Kumar. There were many peculiar
features of the trial like Impey being a close friend of Warren Hastings, judges
cross-examining the witnesses themselves, the petition presented to the King’s
council being rejected by the Supreme Court, and the fact that even after forgery
not being considered as a crime by neither Hindus nor Muslims, Raja Nand Kumar
being given capital punishment. Moreover, Elijah Impey heard the matter along
with two other judges of English origin. The fact that the jury was composed
totally of Englishmen gave another reason for the trial to be a peculiar one where
there were many contradictory testimonies, which were incompatible with the
Indians.

Seeking all the above points, it is clear that this was certainly and openly a case
depicting malfunctioning of ‘natural justice’ during Colonial Rule.

THE ACT OF SETTLEMENT OF 1781:

The Act of Settlement was an Amending Act of 1781, which was passed by British
Parliament on 5th July 1781 to remove the defects of the Regulating Act 1773. It is
also known as Declaratory Act, 1781.

Circumstances that led to the passing of Act of Settlement

● Though the Regulating Act of 1773, brought a great level of change both in
the regulation of affairs and judiciary, there were some significant loopholes
which this act failed to resolve. Basically, to remove the defects of the
Regulating act of 1773, the Act of Settlement 1781 was enacted.
● Firstly, some serious issues with the administration of the Warren
Hastings were there. The relevant examples of such issues are Patna case,
Cosijurah Case and particularly the Nand Kumar case where (Nand
Kumar was hanged). These all issues let to a lot of criticisms of
administration of Warren Hastings.
● Secondly, there was a big tussle between the Supreme Court and
Governor-General in Council which disturbed the balance of
administration to a great extent.
● Also, there was interference in the personal laws of the communities
which had agitated the people.

Also, in the year 1777, a complaint was made by the directors of the company
against the Supreme Court as for them it was difficult to run the administration. To
address this complaint, the House of Commons, appointed a committee known as
Touchet Committee to a do an inquiry about the administration of Bengal, Bihar,
and Odisha. The report of this committee led to the enactment of the Act of
Settlement of 1781.
The Aim of the Act-

1. To remove ambiguity regarding the few provisions of the Regulating Act

and the Charter which had created the division between the court and the
government.
2. To support the lawful government of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, so that
revenue could be collected smoothly.
3. To maintain and protect the laws and customs of the native people.

Key Provisions (features) of the Act:

● Change in the powers of the Supreme Court-The servants of the

company which earlier came within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
were now exempted from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.By the
enactment of this Act, the court’s geographical jurisdiction became
limited to only Calcutta.
● Non-interference in Revenue matters-The court now had no jurisdiction
in the revenue matters concerning revenue, or any act was done in the
collection thereof, the government now became independent of the
control of the court in the matter of revenue.
● The Shift of Appellate Jurisdiction from Court to the Governor-
General and Council-The Appellate jurisdiction shifted in the hands of
the Governor-General and Council. Now, the appeals went from
Provincial Courts to the Governor-General in council.
● The Assertion on the application of the personal laws-This act asserted
that Mohammedan law should be applied on the Mohammedan cases and
similarly, the Hindu law must be applied to Hindu cases.
Impacts of the Act of the Settlement:

● The act gave superior authority to the council over the court and favored
the council.
● This act made the position of the council very strong so that it could
continue to have a good control over the Indian empire.
● It was the first attempt to separate the executive from the judiciary by
defining the respective areas of jurisdiction.

Still, the Act failed to give a vibrant impact and to remove all the flaws of the
Regulating Act of 1773.

CONCLUSION:-These to enactment brought many great changes to the system of

administration and justice.it can also be concluded that the Regulating Act of 1773
laid the foundation of the Central Administration and Parliamentary Control. But,
there were also some drawbacks to both the acts which can’t be ignored.

REFERENCES:

● https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ncert-notes-regulating-act-1773/
● https://www.insightsonindia.com/modern-indian-history/political-policies/
regulating-act-of-1773/
● https://blog.ipleaders.in/regulating-act-1773/
● https://www.gktoday.in/topic/regulating-act-1773_25/
● https://thearticle.in/hindustan/judicial-murder-rajanad-bengal/
● https://blog.ipleaders.in/the-first-judicial-murder-in-colonial-india-raja-
nand-kumar-case/#References