A CRITICAL ESTIMATION OF THE

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN
MADRAS, BOMBAY AND
CALCUTTA (1639- 1726)
Administration Of Justice

In MADRAS
Madras settlement and administration of justice
from 1639 to 1726
 Madras was founded in 1639 by Francis Day who acquired
a piece of land on the eastern sea coast from a Hindu Raja.
Here the company constructed a fortified factory and
named it Fort St. George. The Raja gave the company full
power and authority to govern and administer justice in
Madraspatnam which was a small village lying near the
fort.
 The village came to be called the ‘Black Town’ as most of
the inhabitants were Indians. Inside the fort grew the
‘White Town’ – a settlement of British and other
Europeans.
First phase: 1639- 1665
 The company’s fort at St. George was under the
administration was under an Englishman, called the
Agent.
 The Agent and Council were authorized to decide
both civil and criminal cases of English people
residing at Fort St. George.
 A broad distinction appears to have been made
between the cases in which one or more parties
were Indians and those in which both parties were
Englishmen.
 The authority to punish the offenders
conferred by the charter of Queen
Elizabeth and later confirmed by King
James I, was vague whether the agent and
council could exercise judicial authority
over the native Indians.
 Old traditional courts still continued to govern the natives
and a Choultry Court still administered justice in
Madraspatnam which was presided over by the village
headman called Adigar.

 Till 1648 an Indian village headman of Brahmin caste,

Kannapa was appointed as the first Adigar. However due to
corruption charges, he was put behind bars and henceforth
European persons were appointed to preside over the
Choultry Court.
Charter of 1661
 This charter empowered the company to appoint a
Governor and Council in each of its settlements in India,
who in turn were authorized to judge all persons belonging
to the company or living under them, including the Indians
residing in the settlement in all causes, civil and criminal,
according to the laws of England, and to execute judgment.
The trial of Mrs. Dawes:
 Mrs. Dawes murdered an Indian slave girl named Chequa
alias Francisca. She was charged with the commision of a
capital crime.
 The jury found her guilty of the offence of murder of the
slave girl, but not in the manner and form as stated by the
prosecution.
 When the members of the jury asked the court for further
direction, the court stated that the members of the jury
were bound to bring in a verdict of guilty or not guilty
without any reservation or limitation.
 What was surprising was that the jury gave the verdict not
guilty and the court acquitted her.
Second Phase 1665 -1686
 Reorganization of the judicial system:
 Reappointment of Streynsham Master as Governor
in 1678 the whole judicial system was reorganized.
 The court of governor and council was designated
as the High Court of Judicature. The court met
twice a week and was authorized to decide all civil
and criminal cases with the help of a jury of 12 men.
 The Governor reorganized the Choultry Court.
 Indian officers were replaced by English officers of
the company service.
 The number of judges was increased to 3 out of
which not less than 2 were required to preside over
the trial of the cases and registration of bills of sale
of land and other property.
 Justices were required to sit in court for two days a week,
ie Tuesday’s and Friday’s.
 Cases up to 50 pagodas, both civil and criminal were
entertained in this court. Also appeals from the Choultry
Court were heard.
 English language was recognized as the only official
language in Madras. Till 1680 three languages were used in
the court, namely Portuguese, Tamil, Malayalam.
Third Phase 1686 – 1726.
 The company realized that its monopoly of trade was being
infringed by other foreign and independent traders who
were not authorized to trade with India.
 (a) Admiralty court
In order to curb the unauthorized activities of these
interlopers, the company obtained letters patent from King
Charles II in 1683, which empowered the company to
establish admiralty courts in India whose main purpose
was to determine all cases concerning maritime and
mercantile transaction, cases of forfeiture of ships, piracy,
trespass, injuries wrongs and various crimes on the high
seas.
 The court was guided by the laws and customs of
merchants as well as the rules of equity and good
conscience.
 On 10th July 1686 the Court of Admiralty was established at
Madras and John Grey was appointed Judge of the court
and had 2 English people to assist him.
 Sir John Biggs was appointed Judge - Advocate i.e. the chief
judge of the court of the admiralty at Madras.
 After 1704, it appears that the company paid more
attention to the mayor court and the Governor and the
council gradually replaced the Admiralty court at Madras.
 (b) Mayors Court:1688
This court was part of the Madras Corporation which was
established under the Charter of 1687. In issuing the
charter, the company depended on its power of making
laws under the Charter of 1600 and of governing its
settlements conferred by charter of 1683.
 The company established a Corporation at Madras to apply
a system of Municipal Government there in order for its
growth.

Also a composite body of a few Englishmen and Indians
representing the principal communities in the settlement
was thought to make taxation somewhat palatable to the
native population.
 CORPORATION OF MADRAS: The corporation of
Madras came into existence on September 29 1688.
 It was to consist of a Mayor, 12 Aldermen and 60-120
Burgesses.

The Mayor’s Court was authorized to try all civil and
criminal cases and could punish offences by fine,
amerceament, imprisonment and corporal punishment.
 In civil cases valuing over 3 pagodas, and in criminal cases
when the offender was sentenced to lose life or limb,
appeals from the Mayors Court lay to the Admiralty Court.
 Recorder appointed (Sir John Biggs)
 Death sentence to natives
 The court administered law according to justice and good
conscience and the laws made by the company.
 corruption
 Influence of Executive over Court
 Appointment and removal
 Relations not always cordial
 1704-Admiralty Court ceased to exist-
appeals to Governor and Council
CHOULTRY COURT
 Choultry Court lost importance
 Court of petty jurisdiction
 (civil cases upto 2 pagodas)
 Criminal cases-fine,
imprisonment,whipping,slavery
 1686-1726- 3 courts
 Mayor’s Court-Company’s Court
 Overlapping jurisdiction
 Justice administered by non-lawyers
Administration of justice

In BOMBAY
 Administration of justice in Bombay- the
Bombay settlement.
 The Portuguese were the first to acquire Bombay having a
population of merely 10,000. In 1661 AlfonsusVI transferred the
island to Charles II as dowry on the marriage of his sister
Princess Catherine to the British King
 Finding uneconomic to govern this territory from England,
Charles II transferred it to the East India company in 1668 for
an insignificant annual rent of ₤ 10.
 FIRST PERIOD (1668- 1683)
Charter of 1668:The Charter empowered the Company to
make laws for good government of the Island,
 and to impose for due observance of the said laws,
penalties and punishments by way of fines, imprisonment,
or even death.
 The laws and punishments had to be in consonant to
reason , and were not to be repugnant or contrary, but as
near as might be agreeable, to the laws of England.
 The Company had freedom to create courts and judge all
person and actions.
 “Their proceedings were to be conducted on the lines of
the courts established in England.”
 According to Ilbert, this Charter marks the “transition of
the Company from a trading association to a territorial
sovereign invested with the powers of civil and military
government.”
 JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Gerald Aungier, the Governor of the Surat factory
has been described as the ‘true founder” of
Bombay.
 Due to his efforts, the first judicial system was
established in 1670. Bombay was divided into 2
parts:
 (1)Bombay, Mazagaon, Girgaon and

(2) Mahim, Parel, Sion , Worli
 A court consisting of five judges was started in each
division.
 The customs officer of each division, an Englishman, was to
be the President of the respective court.
 Three judges were to form a quorum.
 Some judges were Indians who were appointed for two
main reasons: So that Englishmen could be spared for
other duties than administration of justice and also to
‘sweeten’ the English Government to the Natives.
 The court was authorized to decide cases of small thefts,
and all civil actions up to 200 Xeraphins.
 The court was required to keep a register of all its
proceeding and was to deliver authentic copies to the
Deputy Governor and Council, which constituted a
superior court.
 It heard appeals from the divisional courts and tried all civil
and criminal cases lying beyond their scope.
 Administration of justice was committed to traders who
had no knowledge of law and who received no salary for
judicial work done by them.
 The judicial system was too identified with the executive
government
 . Aungier was aware of these defects and requested the
Company to send a lawyer so that a better judicial system
might be started in the Island.
 The Company was not however willing to send a Lawyer
apprehending that he would only stir up strife and
litigation in the newly established settlement.
 Therefore, the Company advised Aungier to select someone
knowing something of law from amongst the Company’ s
servants already in India. Aungier’ chose George Wilcox
and a new judicial system was inaugurated in Bombay in
1672 with him as the pivot.
Judicial System of 1672
 The new judicial system consisted of a court with George
Wilcox as the judge.
 The court was to have jurisdiction in all cases, civil,
criminal, probate and testamentary. It was to sit once week
to try civil cases with help of jury.
 Provisions were made for speedy trials and quick decisions
by the court.
 A Fee of five per cent was charged on every case
determined by the court. A plaintiff worth less than 60
xeraphins could sue as a pauper
 . For administration of criminal justice, Bombay was
divided into four sections Bombay, Mahim, Mazegaon and
Sion.
 A Justice of the Peace, an Englishman, was appointed in
each section.
 First , the justice of the peace held a preliminary
examination of the witness against an accused .
 He acted not as a punitive court but only as a committing
magistrate.
 The record of this examination was sent to the court which
sat once a month to try criminal cases with the help of
jury. All justices of the peace sat in the court as assessors
to help the judges deciding criminal cases.


 In the area of civil justice, the court followed a simple and
less technical version of the English procedure.
 It administered justice expeditiously, a case taking ten to
twelve days to be decided.
 Justice was inexpensive, the total charge on an action being
not more than 20 shillings.
 Debtors were kept in prison till they satisfied their debts.
In one case on record, even the body of the Company’s
debtor was attached; it was released by the government
when his relations gave security to satisfy the debt.
 The Jury would usually consist of 12 Englishmen: but in
cases amongst Portuguese and Englishmen, jury would be
half English and half Portuguese.
 In the area of criminal justice , the accused persons were
proceeded against by indictments prepared from records
submitted to the court by justices of peace after
preliminary examination.
 Felonies like murder, rape, and witchcraft were punished
with death according to the English law.
 The scheme of 1672 also created a court of conscience to
decide petty civil cases. Once a week the court dealt
summarily with civil cases under 20 Xeraphins.
 No court fees was charged from poor persons and thus the
court became famous as “ Poor man’s court”.
 The quantum of punishment which was administered were
in accordance to the whims and fancies and prejudices of
the judges.
 The modes of punishments were generally inhuman and
barbarous
Second Period 1684-1690
 The second phase in the development of the judiciary at
Bombay opened with the setting up of an Admiralty Court
in 1684 under the Charter of 1683.
 The Company sent from England Dr. St. John , a person
‘learned in the civil law’, to preside in the court as the
Judge-Advocate on an annual salary of 200 pounds.

Admiralty Court (1684)
 InBombay, the experiment of appointing a
professional lawyer as a judge did not come off as
well as in Madras, as the relations between Dr. St.
John and Child, the Surat Governor , became very
strained.
 The Admiralty Court, to start with, took
cognizance of all cases civil and criminal, in
addition to the admiralty and maritime matters
falling properly within the ambit of the Charter of
1683.
 But later Dr. St. John lost favour with the Governor Child
because he had taken some evidence on a few charges
brought to his notice against the Governor.
 On being asked to desist from taking evidence, the judge
replied that he was bound by oath not to conceal
information coming to him against any body, much less
against those in power.
 Child was no Aungier to believe in the theory of equality
before law. He was offended at this judicial independence
and characterized it as insubordination towards him.
 He retaliated in 1685 by divesting the Admiralty Court of
the function of deciding ordinary civil and criminal cases
and by confining only to maritime and mercantile cases.
 A new court with Vaux as the judge was started to decide
civil and criminal cases practically on the same lines as
1672. Vaux was to be a member of the Bombay Council
also. He had no legal training. Dr. St. John in a complaint to
then Secretary of State described him as a ‘ man ignorant
of law’ and ‘utterly disqualified for the duties of the bench.
 The relations between the Courts of Judge Vaux and Dr. St.
John were not cordial or smooth.
 In a case , Thorburn owed some money to King. King
brought action in Vaux’s Court which gave verdict against
Thorburn. Thorburn appealed to the Admiralty court
which expressed the view that the case should have been
brought before it and that the other court had no
jurisdiction to try it.
 The Bombay council rebuffed the Admiralty court by
resolving that it had no power to examine matters pending
in the ‘King’s Bench of the Common Pleas’ , a description
used for Vaux’s court .
 In another case, a question arose whether an appeal lay
from the Admiralty Court to the Bombay Council. The
Council asserted that such an appeal lay from Admiralty
Court to the Bombay Council . The point was not free from
doubt as the Charter of 1683 had not prescribed any court
of appeal from the Admiralty Court.
 The executive at the time was accustomed to treating the
judiciary as subordinate to itself and not independent of it.
Dr . St. John’s independence could not, therefore , be
palatable to the local executive authorities. Consequently,
the judge was dismissed from his office 1687.

 The treatment meted out to Dr. St. John was in contrast to

that accorded to Sir Biggs at Madras who was appointed as
the Recorder of the Mayor’s Court in addition to his duties
in the Admiralty Court. The reason was that Sir Biggs did,
while Dr. St . John not , enjoy Company’s confidence.
 The Company generally distrusted professional lawyers and
was reluctant to send a professional lawyer to its nascent
little Indian settlement as it was afraid that such persons
would be too independent and create strife and trouble
there .
 The Company had reluctantly agreed to send a professional
lawyer as the judge of Admiralty because of the serious
situation created by the interloper and pirates.
Third Period: 1718-1726
 After three decades, a court appeared again in Bombay on
March 25, 1718.
 It consisted of a Chief Justice and nine other judges, five
British and the remaining four, Indian judges who
represented the four principal communities on the Island,
viz, Hindus, Mohammedans, Portuguese, Christians, and
Parsis.
 The Chief Justice and a few of the English judges were
members of the Governor’s Council.
 The Court was authorized to decide all the cases, civil,
criminal and testamentary.
 It administered justice according to law, equity and good
conscience and Company’s rules and ordinances.
 It served as the registration house for registration of sales
of immovable property and had jurisdiction in matters of
probate and administration of estates.
 Moderate fees were charged.
 Appeals from the court went to the Governor and Council
 The Company generally distrusted professional lawyers and
was reluctant to send a professional lawyer to its nascent
little Indian settlement as it was afraid that such persons
would be too independent and create strife and trouble
there
 The Company had reluctantly agreed to send a professional
lawyer as the judge of Admiralty because of the serious
situation created by the interloper and pirates.
 WORKING OF THE COURT –
The court sat once a week and decided civil,
criminal, military and a prerogative cases.
 Its proceedings were not bound by any technical
rules, law or precedent.
 There were no lawyers to argue the case, no codes,
no reports and no law books..
 Most of the cases coming before it were of a simple nature
and cases concerning partition of estates involving intricate
accounts were usually referred to arbitration.
 The award of the arbitrator could be effective only after
confirmation by the court. Debtors were imprisoned until
debts were repaid.
 To Hindus and Muslims , their customs were applied
 The major work of the court lay in the area of criminal
justice in some cases, it awarded imprisonment for an
indefinite period of incarceration.
 Whipping was the most common punishment, thirty-nine
lashes being the common standard.
 It fell equally on the males and females, and was inflicted in
public so that others might learn a lesson.
 Sometimes , the accused was branded also.
 Treason, theft, rape , murder , manslaughter were capital
offences.
 Robbers were first whipped, then branded with red hot
iron, and then imprisoned with hard labour.
 Habitual and hardened criminals or those guilty of heinous
crimes were usually banished from the Island.
Administration of justice
In CALCUTTA
 PRESIDENCY:
 In December 1699 Calcutta became a presidency and a
president and council were appointed to administer the
settlement.
 The acquisition of the Zamindari was a significant event for
the company which thus secured a legal and constitutional
status within the Moghul administrative machinery.
 As Zamindar, the company became entitled to exercise all
those functions and powers of Zamindari system.
ZAMINDARS JUDICIAL POWERS

 The Zamindars of Bengal collected land revenue and

maintained law and order within their Zamindari limits.
 They enjoyed no judicial power.
 Kazis courts interspersed throughout the country, decide
civil and criminal cases.
 Village panchayats were also quite active and they decide
all kinds of cases except those pertaining serious crimes.
 The judicial system was simple and served the
needs of people.
 The judicial department under the Moghuls was
not well organized as other departments.
 Appeals from the court went to the Governor and
Council.
Kazis and courts
 Moghul administrative structure started disintegrating and
Nawabs authority weakened in Bengal, degeneration in the
ranks of Kazis set in, these offices either remained unfilled for
long or were filled not by people of merit, they became
hereditary offices and even began to be leased to the highest
bidder.
 The judges were paid no salaries.
 They appropriated fines for petty offences and one-fourth of
the debts or property recovered through the court.
 The judicial powers in the hands of Zamindars’s became an
instrument of oppression for the people.
 Judgment were mostly discretionary. There was no definite
body to administer the law. They maintained no register of
proceedings in the court.
 There were corrupt and incompetent Kazis here and there
who dabbed in justice.
The Nawabs Court
 The Nawab’s courts at Murshiabad the seat of government,
fared no better. Their authority had become confined to the
limits of the capital and their existence was not felt beyond
Murshidabad.

 The highest criminal court was that of the Nawab as he was the
head of the Nizamat and as such responsible for maintenance of
law and order and administration of criminal justice.
 The Darogah-Adalat-Al-Alia, who was formerly the Nawab
deputy in the court began to exercise all of the Nawab’s
judicial functions.

 the highest civil court was that of the Diwan who used to
be the head of Diwan and thus was responsible for
collecting land revenue.
 There was no rigid demarcation of jurisdiction amongst the
various courts.

 There was no regular system of law.

 Koran, its commentators, failing whom the customs,

formed the source of laws.
Judicial system in Calcutta:
 Zamindari functions of the Company within the settlement
of Calcutta were entrusted to an English officer, known as
the collector or the Zamindar, who used to be the member
of the Governor's council.
 He discharged judicial powers in all cases, criminal, civil
and revenue pertaining to Indian inhabitants of the
settlement.
 He decided criminal cases expeditiously in a summary
manner and without jury.
 Methods of punishment were whipping, fines, work in
chains on the road, imprisonment, banishment from the
settlement and death.
 The death sentence was executed only after its
confirmation by the governor and council.
 Serious criminal offences committed by the Englishmen
were, however tried by the governor and council under the
authority of the charter of 1661.
 The Zamindar also decided civil cases arising among the
Indians or cases in which an European was the plaintiff and
an Indian was the defendant.
 The Zamindar at times, referred civil cases to arbitration
instead of deciding himself.
 Final Authority:
 The judicial system at Calcutta was extremely rudimentary
and was not all conductive to impartial administration of
justice.
 All judicial powers were concentrated in a single individual,
the collector, who was an executive officer ; the authority
vested in him was very extensive.
 This system continued to operate till 1727 when it was
replaced by a new system under the Charter of 1726 in
common with the other Presidency Towns.
 While before 1727, the judicial system at Calcutta was
based on the Company’s authority as a Zamindar, after
1727, it derived its authority from the Royal Charter.
THE END.