East India company , The charter Act of 1600

Basically the britishers emerged India with the motive of profit i.e. to carry the British commercial
interests in the overseas countries like Asia, Africa and America beyond the cape of good hope eastward
to the straits of Magellan . This was incorporated by queen Elizabeth on 31st dec,1600 . The complete
name of this company was “The Governor and Company of merchants of England trading into the East
Indies.” This Charter settled the constitution, powers and privileges which were to be enjoyed by the
Company. The charter was for 15 years but could be revoked earlier on notice of 2 years if they found
the profit not being adequate. The company was to carry out trade and this right was exclusive as no other
British subject would be given permission and if found punishment or imprisonment . Had general court
who elected a governor and twenty four committees or directories and tenure being of one year but could
be removed
However the company led limited power of legislation also The Company was authorized, in its Genera]
Court, to make, ordain and constitute laws, orders and constitutions etc. These laws were to be reasonable
and were not to be contrary or repugnant to the laws, statutes or customs of the realm of England. The
Company could make laws for the good government of itself, for all its various categories of servants and
officers, and also for the better advancement are\d continuance of its trade and traffic. For due observance
of these laws, the Company could impose pains, punishments and penalties, by way of imprisonment of
body, fines and amercements. It was laid down that these penalties and punishments must he reasonable
and should not be contrary or repugnant to the laws, statutes and customs of the English Kingdom

Charter of 1661
The charter was granted on April 3 ,1661 by Charles II and this charter provided with new privileges to
the company and also this charter improved the administration of justice in settlement of Madras. By this
the company was to appoint governor and council at factories and these council were authorized to judge
all whether civil or criminal as per the laws of England The power of the Governor and Council, which
was restricted formerly to the servants and officers of the Company only, now became extend¬ ed to
those persons also, who happened to live in the settlement but were not the servants of the Company that
also made that the Indian residents oof settlements also under the power of the respective Governor and
Council. The Charter of 1600 had prescribed that the Company could impose punishments only by way of
imprisonment or fine. But, under the new Charter there was no such restriction on the nature of
punishment. All cases, civil and criminal, fell within the jurisdiction of the Governor and Council and
they became entitled to award even the capital sentences in suitable cases.
Two feature of charter however may empathized----e judicial power was granted to the Governor and
Council of each factory, which meant the executive Government of the place. Therefore, there was no
separate¬ Tion between the executive and judiciary at this early period. In the second place, the Governor
and Council were required to administer justice in accordance with the Laws in force in England. This
was a safe-guard provided to the Englishmen. The right of the Englishmen to be governed in accordance
with the English Law, was always protected very tenaciously and, therefore, the Governor and Council
were required to judge them in accordance with the English Law. But this provision which conferred a
privilege on the Englishmen, worked to the distinct disadvantage of the Indians, because it required the
Governor and Council to judge them also according to the English Law. In this scheme, there existed no
provision for preserving and applying to the Indians their own peculiar usages, customs and Laws.

Administration of justice in presidency town-Surat

The company established its first factory in India at Surat in 1612 during time of Mughal emperor
Jahangir. But after some time they felt that to lend permanency to their establishment at Surat, they must
contact the Mughal Emperor and secure facilities directly from him. With this purpose in view, James I
dispatched an ambassador, Sir Thomas Roe. Pie reached the Mughal Court at Agra in 1615 and succeeded
in securing certain facilities for the English. The important ones were :— 1. That the English were to be
allowed to live according to their own religion and laws without interference. 2. Disputes among them
were to be regulated by their own tribunals. 3. Disputes between an Englishman on one hand, and any
Hindu or Muslim on the other, were to be settled by the established local native authorities. 4. In all cases
of complaints and controversies the Mughal Governor or Kazi of the place was required to do Justice to
the English and protect them from all injuries or oppressions whatsoever. He was directed to ‘aid and
entreat them as from with courtesy and honor.’

The important thing, therefore, that Roe was successful in securing from the Mughal Emperor was the
right of self- government for the English. They were to be allowed to trade freely. They were allowed to
establish a factory at Surat; they were also to have the privilege of regulating their affairs and relations
inter se according to their own laws, and to this extent, they were to be exempt from the local
jurisdictions.

Administration at Surat
he factory at the time was merely a trading station where the Company had its warehouses, offices and
residential quarters for its officers. The main business of the Company w7as that of import and export and
for all this they required spacious godowns and warehouses which were located within the factory area.
The President and every member of the Council were appointed by the Company. According to the
practice, all the affairs of the factory were regulated by a majority vote in the Council. The President did
not have any veto power by which he could over-rule his colleagues in the Council. He merely had one
vote; all the important questions were put before the Council, discussed and decided according to the
majority opinion. This system was very much different from the one that subsequently developed and
worked in India under which a Governor had a veto power by which he could over-rule even the majority
opinion in the Council and the governor didn’t had much powers as he was to be known as one among
them. The servants of company divided in three classes and all of them lived together
The Englishmen at Surat were under two sided law---
1 In their own matters by the law of England
2 in matters with Indians by native laws of this country
insisted that cases arising among the Englishmen and the Indians must be decided by the established
tribunal
ls of the land. The Surat settlement of company remained in prominence until 1617,but due to the transfer
of seat and president to Bombay this year Surat lost its importance as company

Settlement and administration of justice in madras

The Judicial institutions in the town of Madras before 1726, developed in three stages. Madras was
founded in 1639 by one Francis Day who succeeded in acquiring a piece of land from a Hindu raja and he
also authorized the Company along with the grant of the piece of land. The Company was empowered to
mint money and to govern Madraspatnam, which at the time was a small village existing near the
Company's Fort. In course of time this village grew. Many persons were attracted to this place on account
of the facilities of trade and commerce that it offered. The village came to be known as the Black Town as
it was inhabited by the Indians. Inside the Fort resided the Europeans and the British servants of the
Company and this settlement came to be known as the White Town. The whole establishment comprising
of the White and Black Towns later came to be known as Madras.
FIRST STAGE(1639 TO 1665)
To start with, Madras was merely an agency. Its ad¬ ministrative head was known as an Agent. He, along
with a small Council, regulated all the matters and affairs of the Factory. The judicial system that existed
at this stage was conspicuous by absence of any systematic and regular administration of justice . The
only system existed was ---
1 agent and his council for white town
2 The choultry court for the black town From very early times, there functioned a Choultry Court in the
village of Madraspatnam. This was on the usual pattern of village administration in those days. The
village headman, known as Adigar, used to sit in the Choultry Court and decide petty civil cases and
small breaches of peace. The Choultry Court also served as the Custom House and Registration House of
sales of immovable property. This Court continued to function even when the village of Madraspatnam
had become transformed into the ‘Black Town'. No other tribunal, except the primitive Choultry Court,
functioned in the Black Town during this early period. Nothing is known about the method of trial and
procedure in serious criminal cases like murder etc.,
Charter of 1661 granted that brought changes

Second stage (1665 to 1686)

The second phase of the judicial development in the Madras settlement began with the gradual
implementation of the Charter of 1661. Though the Charter conferred wide judicial powers on the
Governor and Council of a settlement, it was not immediately enforced in Madras, leading to a
continuation of informal practices. A turning point came in 1665 with the criminal trial of Mrs. Ascentia
Dawes, who was charged with the murder of her slave girl. As per usual practice, the matter was referred
to the Company authorities in England. This highlighted the inefficiency and lack of local legal authority,
prompting the Company to enforce the Charter of 1661 in Madras. Consequently, Madras was elevated
from an Agency to a Presidency, and the Agent was designated as Governor in 1665. The Charter’s
application extended judicial authority of the Governor and Council to all persons residing in the
settlement, including natives and Englishmen alike.
The Dawes trial was significant as it was decided with the help of both grand and petty juries. This case
highlighted how the administration of justice, although formally under English law as per the Charter,
was in practice governed by the common sense and discretion of laymen without legal training.
The impacts of this phase were mixed. Although the Charter of 1661 marked a step towards
institutionalizing English legal norms, the judicial system in Madras lacked regularity, efficiency, and
legal expertise. Delays in criminal trials were common, and serious cases often awaited direction from
England. Justice delivery remained inconsistent and was not of high quality. In criminal cases, the
accused had to wait for long before they were put on trial because the Governor and Council, similar to
their predecessor Agent and Council, lacked legal knowledge and were hesitant to decide criminal cases
without consulting the Company’s authorities in England.
•In March 1678, the Governor and Council resolved that they would sit as a Court for two days a week to
decide the cases in all civil and criminal matters, according to the laws of England, with the help of a jury
of twelve men. This Court was designated as the High Court of Judicature and was formally inaugurated
on 27 March 1678.
•Along with this, the Choultry Court was also reorganized to consist of the Company’s servants and was
to sit twice a week to try small misdemeanors, matters of peace, civil action up to 50 pagodas, and cases
of a higher value with the consent of the parties.
•All other cases and appeals from the Choultry Court were to be heard by the Court of the Governor and
Council with the help of a jury. Thus, a hierarchy of courts was created in Madras.

Stage 3 [1683-1726]
Admiralty court

In 1683, King Charles II issued a charter which empowered the company to established courts of
admiralty in India. The courts of admiralty were authorized to try all traders who committed various
crimes on high seas. The courts were empowered to hear & determine all cases concerning maritime
&mercantile transaction. The courts was authorized to deal with all cases
forfeiture [seized] of ships, piracy, trespass, injuries & wrongs. It was stated that the court would be
guided by the laws & customs of merchants as well as rules of equity & good conscience in the task of
administration of justice, The provision of the charter 1683 was written by James II in the charter issued
in 1686, the court of admiralty was at madras by ‘john gray’ who appointed as a judge and English men
were appointed to assist him. Later in 1687 ‘sir john Biggs’ who was a professional lawyer with expertise
in civil law was appointed
as a chief judge of the court. There after the governor & the council relinquished the judicial function
&ceased to sit at the court. The jurisdiction of the admiralty court was not confined to mercantile &
maritime cases it also decided both civil & criminalcases.Theadmiralty court heard appeals from the
mayor’s court & this became general court of settlement. The admiraltycourtwas functioning regularly
till1704, but there after is ceased to sit on regular basis and gradually disappeared
& its jurisdiction was again transferred to the governor & the council.

Mayor’s court
The mayor score, also known as court of record, consisted of the mayor and all the elder man the quorum
for the court was 1 mayor and 2 senior aldermen jurisdiction extended to all civil and criminal matters.
Civil matters over three pagoda and criminal matters. Offender was sentenced to lose. Life or limbs A
lawyer member who was English born called as recorder of the court, was appointed by mayor and elder
man for helping them in deciding the cases of considerable value. This charter also appointed the first
recorder.

Under charter of 30 the December 1687, the company established madras corporation & Mayor court was
part of this corporation. In the year 1686 madras govt. levied a house tax on the madras city for the repair
of the city wall. But the people madras didn’t pay any tax & the company face problems & difficulties to
collect tax. After this the company decided that in order to make tax collection easy a body should be
framed consisting of English men as well as local Indians. The corporation comprises of both the English
men & the Indian native which made it easy for tax collection. The corporation came into existence on 29
sept, which consisted of 1 mayor, 12 alder men & 60-120 burgesses (local natives). It was decided that
every year new mayor will be elected from the 12 people who constituted alder men community. The
election was democratic in nature & voting was done by alder men & burgesses. The retiring could also
be re-elected. The alder men & burgesses had the power to remove the mayor if he was unable to perform
his duties. The alder hold office along as they stayed in the city of madras. Mayor & burgesses had the
power to remove alder men if they
didn.t their duties well. This charter appointed 29 burgesses & rest was appointed by the mayor & alder
men. This was a nature corporation were the mayor & 3 senior most alder men were to be ‘justices of
peace’. The mayor & alder men were to form a ‘court of record’ where they could try civil & criminal
cases. This was known as mayor
court. It's decision, lacked the uniformity and consistency

Choultry court
The old choultry was reorganized & allowed to continue by the governor. Theno. of judges was increased
to 3. The court met 2 days in a week. The court was empowered civil cases up to ’2 pagodas’& petty
criminal matters. The high court of judicature was authorized to hear appeals from the choultry court.
The overall picture of administration of justice in madras was not very good in these early stages. The
system suffer many drawbacks the most outstanding of them are as follows:

.Absence of proper judicial system.

Uncertainty of laws:- the court and people didn’t know what laws were applicable to them & who to reach
for dispute settlement.
Lack of facilities in the jail:- the inmates live in inhuman conditions.
Unfair trail:- the English principle of fair trail such as: principle of natural justice & benefit of doubt to
the accused was not observed specially when accused was a Indian native.
Severe punishment:- usually the punishment was inhuman they were. Based on mixed idea of prevention.
They also heard the mayor court appeal till 1727 when Mayor court was established under the 1726 Royal
charter

Calcutta settlement
The foundations of the city of Calcutta were laid on 24th August 1690 by Job Charnock, who established
a trading post at Sutanati on the banks of the river Hooghly. The British East India Company soon
fortified this settlement, constructing Fort William to secure its commercial interests. In 1668, the
Company acquired the zamindari rights over the villages of Calcutta, Sutanati, and Govindpuri from
Prince Azimush-shan, the grandson of Aurangzeb, for an annual payment of ₹1,195. This acquisition gave
the Company administrative and revenue-collection rights, though it did not initially confer formal
judicial authority. However, with the formal declaration of Calcutta as a Presidency in December 1699, a
President (or Governor) and Council were appointed to manage the settlement’s affairs, including
rudimentary judicial functions. Under the Mughal system, zamindars primarily collected land revenue and
maintained law and order, while judicial authority rested with the Kazi’s courts operating at various
administrative levels—from the Subah to the village. Village panchayats handled local disputes, except
serious criminal cases. Over time, especially in regions where official judicial mechanisms were weak or
absent, zamindars began exercising informal judicial powers. In Bengal, this vacuum allowed the
Company, in its capacity as zamindar, to gradually assume judicial functions, laying the foundation for
parallel colonial legal institutions that would eventually override traditional systems of justice.

Mayors court 1726

The Mayor’s Court was established in India by the Charter of 1726, issued by King George I is often
called a watershed in Indian legal history. This marked the beginning of the Crown’s formal judicial
presence in the British territories of India. The Charter was a response to the East India Company’s
request, as it struggled with the growing complexities of administration and justice in the Presidency
towns—Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. The Charter aimed to bring uniformity and legitimacy to judicial
processes by establishing civil and criminal courts that derived their authority directly from the British
Crown rather than the Company.
Each Presidency town received a Corporation comprising a Mayor one required to be a natural bond,
British, subject and nine Aldermen, predominantly British subjects. The Mayor’s Court had the
jurisdiction to try civil cases and probate matters within the Presidency towns and their subordinate
factories. It was a Court of Record and could grant probates and letters of administration. Appeals from
this court went to the Governor and Council, and cases involving amounts above 1,000 pagodas could be
appealed to the King-in-Council in England. However, the Charter did not clearly define the law to be
applied, leaving decisions to the court’s interpretation of “justice and right.” there was an officer sheriff
having jurisdiction in presidency town and for 10 miles around to be chosen annually by the governor and
Council.
The charter of 1726, also constituted a court of consisting of the governor and council of each presidency
to hear civil appeals against the decision of the mayor court to decide criminal case, the governor and five
members of council were appointed as justice of peace, individually, justice of peace, collectively
constitute a court of record They were have power of the court of over and terminer and Goal delivery
and required to hold quarter session four times a year for the trial of all offences except high treason
A petty jury of 12 persons for the actual trial and grand jury of 24 persons for preliminary findings of an
offence assisted the court
The charter of 1726, authorize the governor and council of each presidency to make bylaws rules and
ordinance for good governance and regulation of the Corporation. The laws made by Governor and
council must be agreeable to reason, not be contrary to the laws and the statutes of England and must be
approved by the company's board of directors in England

Difference between mayor court of 1726, and Madras mayor court

Mayor court of 1687 was a court of the company. The charter of 1726, the court established was the court
of the crown
The mayor court had a lawyer attached to it called the recorder, although in 1726, no provision for any
lawyer member
In 1687, good representation of Indians in the court, but in 1726, in spite of the provision for two Indian
members, none was ever appointed in practice.
Aspect Madras Charter, 1687 Charter of
1726
Jurisdiction Only Madras; civil and criminal matters had a wider jurisdiction Madras, Bombay,
Calcutta; civil and testamentary matters It had a jurisdiction in civil matters only in
addition to its testamentary and probate jurisdiction, criminal jurisdiction with the governor and
Council
Source of Authority East India Company (Company Charter) British Crown
(Royal Charter by King George I)
Appeal Mechanism Appeal to Court of Admiralty Appeal to
Governor-in-Council; further to King-Council
Representation of Indians Better participation; more inclusive Theoretically
allowed but none appointed; exclusionary
Legal Advisors Recorder attached for guidance No lawyers;
decisions made by laymen (Mayor and Aldermen)
Legacy Early experiment in municipal justice Foundation for
structured colonial judiciary

The company sent the charter of 1727 to each presidency, along with the communication of 17 February
1727, and legal materials to guide course in their proceedings

Criticism
There is a biased decision dispute between companies servant and Indian criminal matters. No difference
between the judiciary and executive because judiciary was unaware of English laws as well as the custom
of the natives cases were decided by the self-interpretation of law and full discretion of its member,
absence of control over court jurisdiction of the court was not beyond the territorial limits of presidency
town. There were no lawyers to defend the parties and the representation of Indian judges was denied in
this court.
French occupied madras in 1746-1749
Then came charter of 1753 by king George II
The Charter of 1753 was issued by the British Crown to reform the judicial system established under the
Charter of 1726 in the three Presidency towns of Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. It was aimed at
addressing the shortcomings and complaints about the Mayor’s Courts and governance in British India.
The mayor court was expressly authorized to entertain action against the mayor, no interested person can
sit as a judge in his own case, and the jurisdiction of the mayor Court was restricted to suits of the value
of five pagoda’s
A court of request was created to hear small civil cases up to the value of five pagoda in each presidency
sitting once in a week. The number of commissioners were between 8 to 24. Three of this commissioners
used to sit in the court at one time by rotation, quick and summary decision jurisdiction to decide the
matters of native people, judges of the court are commissioner that were appointed by the governor and
council among the servants of the company.
Later on Supreme Court was established in Calcutta, 1774. In course of time Supreme Court were
established at Madras and Bombay as well.
In Madras, the choultry Court decided the cases up to value of 20 pagoda. This court began to work in
1775 till 1800 when it was finally abolished later, a court under the servant of the company was created to
decide the dispute between the natives up to the value of five pagoda. The court was replaced in 1798 by
the recorder court.
In Calcutta, natives put under the jurisdiction of Zamindar’s court, however, some dispute arose between
Zamindar’s court and Mayor’s court over their jurisdiction to decide civil suits above ₹20 with the right to
appeal to the governor and council. In cases above the valuation of rupees hundred justice of peace were
appointed to decide criminal cases they were entitled to give any punishment, including the punishment of
death and the capital offences were tried by a bench of three justice of peace.
In Bombay, no separate court were established to decide the dispute among natives since company claim
full sovereignty over the island

Warren hasting plan 1772-74

• After the British East India Company gained Diwani rights (revenue and civil administration) in
Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa in 1765, there was a need to organize civil governance.
• In 1772, Warren Hastings, the first Governor-General of Bengal, introduced a systematic judicial
and revenue administration plan to address growing lawlessness, corruption, and inefficiency.
• Soon after battle of Plassey, the company servant could be seen committing breach of peace
injustice even the governor and Council member exploited the country through Private trade used to
supplement their low salaries. No responsibility for the welfare of the people. They use the situation to
further their own selfish ends to become rich within the shortest possible time.
To improve the situation, governor verelst in 1769 appointed the companies servant as supervisor for each
district, however, it failed due to the limited number of supervisors with no experience then in 1769-70
Bengal famine the situation continue deteriorated with hunger starvation
In 28 August 1771, Company directors declare their determination to take upon the entire care and
management of revenue governor. Warren Hastings adopt necessary regulation like the judicial plan of
1772.
In this, the Kazi were appointed not on merit, character or education, but as a matter of official favor or
indulgence, no regular salaries were paid existence of corrupt judges, corrupt government and absence of
any register appeal. The civil court used to charge commission on all amount recovered through their
help. The court of Justice has become corrupt from this Warren Hastings judicial plan was integrated for
revenue collection to promote impartial and inexpensive justice with the district as the unit the territory of
Bengal Bihar, Orissa was divided into number of districts. Each district had an English Company servant
appointed as a collector responsible for collection of land revenue.
Courts of original jurisdiction
• Mofussil faujdar Adalat -established in each district to try all kind of criminal cases consist of
Muslim law officers, such as Kazi, Mufti, and moluvies. Moluvies were to expound the Muslim law of
crimes, and the Kazi and Mufti were to give futwa and render judgement accordingly. The collector was
required to exercise general supervision over the Adalat. Four cases involving sentence of death forfeiture
of property of the accused proceeding to be submitted to the Sadar Niza mat Adalat for final orders
• Mofussil diwani Adalat -established in each district with collector as the judge authorized to decide
all civil cases, real and personal property, inheritance, marriage, cast contract, partnership, personal law to
apply native Indians for family, law related matters, Latin law officers, Kazi and Pandit were appointed to
expound respectively, the Muslim and Hindu law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the disputes
• Small cause Adalat - dispute up to ₹10 to be decided, finally by the head farmer of the pergunnah,
where the dispute arose
To improve the situation, governor verelst in 1769 appointed the companies servant as supervisor for each
district, however, it failed due to the limited number of supervisors with no experience then in 1769-70
Bengal famine the situation continue deteriorated with hunger starvation
In 28 August 1771, Company directors declare their determination to take upon the entire care and
management of revenue governor. Warren Hastings adopt necessary regulation like the judicial plan of
1772.
In this, the Kazi were appointed not on merit, character or education, but as a matter of official favor or
indulgence, no regular salaries were paid existence of corrupt judges, corrupt government and absence of
any register appeal. The civil court used to charge commission on all amount recovered through their
help. The court of Justice has become corrupt from this Warren Hastings judicial plan was integrated for
revenue collection to promote impartial and inexpensive justice with the district as the unit the territory of
Bengal Bihar, Orissa was divided into number of districts. Each district had an English Company servant
appointed as a collector responsible for collection of land revenue.
Courts of original jurisdiction
• Mofussil faujdar Adalat -established in each district to try all kind of criminal cases consist of
Muslim law officers, such as Kazi, Mufti, and moluvies. Moluvies were to expound the Muslim law of
crimes, and the Kazi and Mufti were to give futwa and render judgement accordingly. The collector was
required to exercise general supervision over the Adalat. Four cases involving sentence of death forfeiture
of property of the accused proceeding to be submitted to the Sadar Niza mat Adalat for final orders
• Mofussil diwani Adalat -established in each district with collector as the judge authorized to decide
all civil cases, real and personal property, inheritance, marriage, cast contract, partnership, personal law to
apply native Indians for family, law related matters, Latin law officers, Kazi and Pandit were appointed to
expound respectively, the Muslim and Hindu law applicable to the facts and circumstances of the disputes
• Small cause Adalat - dispute up to ₹10 to be decided, finally by the head farmer of the pergunnah,
where the dispute arose
Appellate court at Calcutta
• Sadar nizam at Adalat – consisted on Indian Judge known as Daroga-I-Adalat assisted by the
Chief Kazi, Chief Mufti and three Moulvies These officials are appointed by the Nawab on the advice of
Governor. Function: To revise the proceedings of the Mofussil Niza mat Adalat's and approve finally
sentences of death and forfeiture of property. In the cases of death, a death warrant was prepared by the
Adalat and was signed by the Nawab. The Governor and Council exercised a general supervision over the
proceedings of the Sadar Niza mat Adalat.
• Sadar diwani Adalat - Consisted of Governor and members of the Council To hear appeal from
Mofussil Diwani Adalat's in cases of over five hundred rupees. First sitting held on 17th March 1773.Fee
of 5 per cent was fixed on each petition of appeal. Appeal to be filed within two months from the date of
the decree given by the Mofussil Adalat.
Other features
All Adalat maintain proper register and records any case older than 12 years was not maintainable also
methods of arbitration were also provided.
Criticism
 1. The court for small cases was less in number with jurisdiction only up to a small amount of
Rs. 10 which was a very small amount. For all other cases, the people faced difficulty traveling to
the district headquarters as there was only one Adalat. And over centralization of powers
2. The Collectors were given too much authority which they could easily misuse. He was at
once the administrator, tax collector, civil judge, and supervisor of criminal judicature.
3. It has limited application only in the territories of Bengal Bihar Odisha and consists of only the Hindus
and Muslims no other communities and races were there
4. The judges of the courts being Englishmen, they did not have knowledge of personal laws of Hindus
and Muslims. Though native laws officers were appointed to assist the English judges, but they could
easily misguide the judges by deliberately misinterpreting the provisions of the Quran and Shastras.
Judicial plan of 1774
Warren Hastings prepared new Plan on November 23, 1773 which was implemented in January 1774.The
various changes made in regard to revenue, civil justice, criminal reforms.
Collectors found to be monopolizing the trade. A new plan needed to collect revenue and administer
justice. Collectors were recalled from the districts and in their place an Indian officer, called Diwan or
Amil, was appointed. Mofussil area – 6 divisions; Each division had a Provincial Council with 4–5
British servants of the Company. Indian Naib Diwans were appointed in the districts under each
Provincial Council to look after the same work.
Criticism
Although the new system was an improvement over the earlier one, the change did not give good results
for long.
The Council took the place of the Collector in creating the difficulties and monopolizing the trade within
its jurisdiction. Warren Hastings detected this defect very soon but he could not make any change till
1780 when entirely a new modified system was established.

• Judicial Plan of 1780

o Separation of revenue matters from judicial matters
o Diwani Adalat in each six divisions.
o Reforms of Sir Impey (sole Judge of Sadar Diwani Adalat and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
at Calcutta)

Judicial plan 1773 SYSTEM REFORMS

After the Battle of Plassey, the British Government realized: an increase in the wealth of the Company’s
servants and a decrease in the income of the Company.
The company sought a loan of one million pounds from the British Government. From this the House of
Commons appointed two committees select and secret committees it came into force 21 June 1773
Main objective of the act
To reform the constitution of the East India Company
b)To reform the Company’s Government in India
c)To provide remedies against the illegalities and oppression of the Company’s servants in India.
Changes in the Company: The Regulating Act effected two major changes in the Company –
The term of directors was increased from one year to four years and provision was made for electing one-
fourth of the directors every year in rotation.
Voting power of shareholders was restricted to those who held stock worth GBP 1000 or more in the
Company.
Governor-General and Council—In place of the Governor and Council, a Governor-General and Council
consisting of four Councilors was appointed at Calcutta.
The decisions of the Council were taken by the majority. In case of equal division, the Governor-General,
and in his absence the seniormost Councilor, had a casting vote.
 The governor had no power to override the majority in the Council, which could defeat any of his
policies.
These officers held the office for five years though could be removed earlier by the King on the
recommendation of the Directors.
. Powers and duties of the Council—
The entire civil and military government including the ordering, management, and governance of all the
territorial acquisitions and revenues of the Presidency of Calcutta and the provinces of Bengal, Bihar, and
Orissa, was vested in the Governor-General and Council. The Governor-General and Council were
required to furnish all information relating to the government, commerce, and interest of the Company.
Control of Madras and Bombay—
The government of the Presidencies of Madras and Bombay were put under the superintendence and
control of the Governor-General and Council to the extent that they (Madras and Bombay Governments)
could not commence hostilities, declare war, or conclude any treaty of peace or other treaty with any
Indian prince or power without their prior consent and approbation of the Governor-General and Council.
The Governor-General and Council could make any rules, regulations, and ordinances they thought just
and reasonable for the order and good governance of Calcutta. In case of breach of such rules, they could
also provide punishment.
The Governor-General, the Councilors, Chief Justice, and other Judges of the Supreme Court were
prohibited from accepting any present, gift, donation, gratuity, or reward from any person and from
carrying on any trade or commerce of any kind for their personal use, benefit or advantage.
The Supreme Court—
Section 13 of the Act made detailed provisions for the establishment of a Supreme Court at Calcutta and
authorized King George II to issue a Charter for that purpose.
Court: Chief Justice and 3 puisne judges to be appointed by the Crown and holding office during its
pleasure.
Eligibility: Barrister of at least five year’s standing could be appointed as a judge.
Jurisdiction: Civil, Criminal, Admiralty, and Ecclesiastical
In Criminal Cases: Court to act as a court of oyer and terminer and goal delivery for the Town of Calcutta
and the factories subordinate.
Use of Grand and Petty Jury
Criticism
There is conflict between governor general and councilors and undefined position of the company the
imminent necessity undefined there is conflict between judiciary and executive
Achievements
It made changes in the personnel of the Governor's Council by which the doings of the Company’s
servants would henceforth by controlled by men who have no personal interest to serve by cloaking
misgovernments in the districts , and who presumably would be free from the class prejudices of the
Company’s servants .
It substituted a Court of King’s Judges and professional men of the law for a Court of Company’s
servants who were removable by the Company’s servants.
Charter of SC 1774
In pursuance of the Regulating Act, King George III issued a Charter establishing the Supreme Court at
Calcutta on 26 March 1774.
The Charter defined the powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court more elaborately.
Supreme Court – Court of Record. It had the power to punish for its contempt.
Chief Justice - Sir Elijah Impey
Puisne Judges – Robert Chambers, Stephen Caesar LeMaistre, and John Hyde
Judges to hold office during the pleasure of the crown
For criminal cases, the Court could summon a grand and petty jury consisting of His Majesty’s subjects
residing in Calcutta.
The court had the power to reprieve or suspend the execution of any capital sentence. Court to transmit to
the Crown the record of the case with reasons for exercising mercy.
Court: Chief Justice and 3 puisne judges to be appointed by the Crown and holding office during its
pleasure.
Eligibility: Barrister of at least five year’s standing could be appointed as a judge.
Jurisdiction: Civil, Criminal, Admiralty, and Ecclesiastical
Civil
The civil jurisdiction of the Court was of two kinds: (I) territorial and (ii) personal.
With respect to the Presidency of Calcutta, the Supreme Court had a territorial jurisdiction, and therefore,
civil matters relating to all persons, arising within the Presidency of Calcutta fell within the jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court.
Beyond the Presidency limits and within the provinces of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, the Supreme Court
had only personal jurisdiction. Therefore, a suit could be filed in the Supreme Court against the following
categories of persons, irrespective of the location of the cause of action.
Equity Jurisdiction -
The Supreme Court is a Court of Equity
They have the full power to administer justice as nearly as the High Court of Chancery in Great Britain.
Criminal Jurisdiction—
The criminal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court extended to all British subjects residing in Calcutta and
within the territory of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
Only the British people and their servants and persons employed with the Company were covered under
this jurisdiction. Other natives were not subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had to follow as far as possible, the procedure of the English courts and worked as a
Court of Oyer and Terminer and Goal Delivery in and for the town of Calcutta, the Factory at the Fort
William, and the Factories subordinate to it.
The trial was to be held with the help of a petty jury.
The Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to try the Governor-General and the members of his Council or
the Judges of the Supreme Court except in cases of treason or felony.
Mercy petitions were referred to the Crown in England on the recommendations of the Supreme Court.

Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction—
The Supreme Court had the same jurisdiction over British subjects in India as the ecclesiastical’ courts in
England at that time.

In that capacity the Supreme Court functioned as a court of testamentary and probate jurisdiction. It also
appointed guardians and keepers for infants’ and lunatics’ properties.

In Criminal Cases: Court to act as a court of oyer and terminer and goal delivery for the Town of Calcutta
and the factories subordinate.
Use of Grand and Petty Jury
Appeals against the decisions of the Supreme Court could be filed before the King-in-Council in all civil
cases valued at 1000 pagodas or more. In criminal matters an appeal before the King-in-Council could be
filed only through the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had the authority to allow or reject any appeal.
The Supreme Court was the first British Court in India consisting of lawyer judges.
It was fully independent of the control of Company's Government in India.
Its jurisdiction was so wide that every legal wrong of any kind could be redressed by it.
All the Governors, Commanders, Magistrates, Officers and Ministers, civil and military, and all subjects
within the provinces Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa were required to assist and obey the Supreme Court
powers, jurisdiction, and authority.
Criticism
The relationship between the Governor-General and Council, and the Supreme Court was not clearly
defined. The position of the Governor-General and Council in the exercise of their Diwani function vis-a-
vis the powers of the Supreme Court was also not clear.
The relationship between the Company’s Courts in the mofussil area and the Supreme Court was also not
clear. Ex – Patna case.
The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was not clearly defined with respect to territory outside the
Presidency limits of Calcutta.
Terms like ‘British subjects’, ‘subjects of His Majesty’, and ‘persons employed directly or indirectly in
the service of the Company’ as used in the Act and the Charter were not clear. Ex- Patna case.
The Charter declared the Judges of the Supreme Court as Justices of Peace and had such authority as the
Judges of the King’s Bench in England. On that basis, the judges began to issue writs beyond the
Presidency of Calcutta which the people, particularly the British, resented.
The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was not clearly mentioned about the natives. Ex- Cossijurah case.
The Act did not make any clear provisions about the law which the Supreme Court had to apply in the
proceedings before it. Although it applied English law, it was not clear about the extent of its application.
The position of natives living within the Presidency limits of Calcutta was also not clear. Whether they
shall be governed by English law or by their own law in the disputes amongst themselves was not clearly
indicated.
The Supreme Court applied the law of England in criminal matters which was very harsh and severe. Ex –
Raja Nand Kumar case.
Act of settlement 1781
Dissatisfaction among the people, Europeans, Government, and its officers against the Supreme Court.
With Cossijurah case, the relationship between the Supreme Court and the Supreme Council had broken
down and they were in conflict with each other.
In 1780, the House of Commons appointed a Select Committee, known as Touchet Committee, to hold a
thorough enquiry into the administration of justice in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
The Committee Report led to the passage of the Act of Settlement, 1781.
Purpose of the act
to remove doubts and difficulties which had arisen regarding, the true intent and meaning of certain
clauses in the Regulating Act and the Charter which had created dissensions between the Supreme Court
and the Government and which, if not removed, might lead to further mischief and misunderstanding;
to support the lawful Government of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, so that revenue might be collected with
certainty; and
to maintain and protect the inhabitants in the enjoyment of all their ancient laws, usages, rights, and
privileges.
Amendment
The Governor-General and Council were excluded from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for all
things done or ordered by them in their public capacity and as Governor-General and Council.
. Any other person who acted on the written orders of the Governor-General and Council was also
exempted from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Revenue matters and the matters arising in the collection of revenue were totally excluded from the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
The Act also mentioned that Hindus and Mohammedans in all their matters arising out of inheritance and
succession to land and goods and all matters of contracts and dealings between the parties were to be
decided according to their personal law. If the case was between a Mohammedan and a Hindu then
according to the law of the defendant.
Sadar Diwani Adalat, established under the Plan of 1772, was declared as a court of record having final
jurisdiction in civil matters. Appeals against its decisions went to the Privy Council in matters of the
value of Rs. 5000 or more. The Adalat was not in any way subordinate to the Supreme Court.
 Offences committed in the collection of land revenue were also put under the jurisdiction of the Sadar
Diwani Adalat and the Supreme Court was denied jurisdiction to entertain such cases.
The Supreme Court was authorized to make procedural rules, regulations, etc., in accordance with the
needs of the people to whom the law was to be applied and, therefore, they were as far as possible,
confirmable to their habit. The rules, regulations, etc., were to be laid before His Majesty for approval and
His Majesty had the right to approve, correct, or reject them.
The Act gave extensive legislative powers to the Governor-General and Council for the purpose of
making laws for Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. They could frame regulations for the provincial courts and
Councils, the copies of which were to be submitted within six months of their enforcement to the
Directors of the Company and to one of His Majesty’s Secretaries of State.
Criticism
Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts with respect to Indians was not clear as to whether it had
the power to issue the instruments of administration or probates in the case of a Hindu or a
Mohammedan.The Act does not define the inhabitants of Calcutta.
The Supreme Court issued such writs against the decisions of the Courts in the Mofussil area and also
issued the writ of habeas corpus to release the persons detained under the orders of the courts.
However, The act was not a long-term solution to the company’s affairs and was followed by the Pitt’s
India Act in 1784, which was a more radical reform

Raja Nand Kumar

Background:

* *Raja Nand Kumar* accused *Warren Hastings*, the Governor-General, of accepting bribes.
* In retaliation (allegedly), Hastings initiated a prosecution against Nand Kumar.
* He was tried in June 1775 by the *Supreme Court at Calcutta* for *forgery*, based on an old charge
from 1770.
* He was *found guilty* and *hanged on 5th August 1775*.

Key Legal Issues:

1. *Jurisdiction*: Whether the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction to try Nand Kumar, as the act was
committed before the Court’s establishment.
2. *Applicability of British Law: Whether the British **Act of 1729*, which made forgery a capital
offense, applied to India.

Court Decisions:

* The Supreme Court ruled against Nand Kumar on both counts.

* It rejected arguments about jurisdiction and the applicability of the 1729 Act.
* It dismissed petitions for appeal and mercy, declaring Nand Kumar guilty under English law.

Controversy:

* The case is often seen as *judicial murder*, due to:

* Questionable *motive* (revenge by Hastings).

 * Doubts over *jurisdiction* and *fairness of the trial*.
* Use of *English law* for a colonial subject unfamiliar with it.
* The judge, *Elijah Impey, was a **friend of Hastings*.

Legacy:

* The case is a stark example of the *conflict between colonial and traditional Indian legal systems*, and
how early British courts exercised power in India, often controversially.

Kasijora Case:
Background:

* A person named *Kashinath* filed a *debt suit* in the Supreme Court against *Sundernarain, the
**Raja of Kasijora*.
* It was alleged that the Raja indirectly served the Company by paying revenue, thus placing him under
the *jurisdiction of the Supreme Court*.
* The Court issued an *arrest warrant* against the Raja and set bail at *Rs. 3,00,000*.

Government's Response:

* The *Governor-General and Council, acting on the **Advocate-General's* advice, resisted the Court's
move, asserting it would imply *recognition of the Supreme Court's authority*.
* A *general notice* was sent to all zamindars stating they were *not bound to appear before the Court*.

Escalation:

* The *Raja went into hiding, prompting the Supreme Court to **confiscate his property*.
* In response, the Governor-General and Council ordered the *Midnapore Cantonment Commander* to
*intercept the Sheriff’s
men, leading to their **arrest and imprisonment*.

Legal Fallout:

* *Kashinath* filed for a writ against Warren Hastings and Councilor Barwell.
* The *Court issued writs* but was unable to *enforce them*—showing limits of its power.
* Eventually, *Council members pleaded their case*, and the Supreme Court withdrew proceedings.

Consequences of the Kasijora Case:

1. *Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was reduced*—especially over revenue-related matters.

2. It *weakened the dignity* and perceived power of the Supreme Court.
3. It showed a need for *jurisdictional clarity* between Company courts and the Supreme Court.
4. Led to the *Settlement Act of 1781, which **limited the Court's authority* and indemnified the
Governor-General
and Council for past actions.

Significance:
The Kasijora case illustrates the *power struggle between the executive (Company officials)* and the
*judiciary (Supreme Court)*
in colonial India, and helped lay the foundation for *statutory limitations on judicial overreach*.

The Patna Case:

Background:

*Naderah Begum, a widow, filed a suit in the Supreme Court in 1777 against **Behadar Beg* (her
husband's nephew), the
*Qazi of Patna, and two **Muftis*.
* The dispute centered on property rights following the death of her husband *Sahbaz Beg Khan*.
Behadar Beg claimed
inheritance as an adopted son, supported by a disputed gift deed.
* The *Patna Council*, not the Supreme Court, had initially handled the matter, ordering a division of
property under
Mohammedan law.

Legal Conflict:

Naderah Begum, feeling aggrieved by the Patna Council's decision, fled to Calcutta and filed charges of
*trespass and assault*
against Behadar Beg and the religious officials.
The Supreme Court had to decide:

1. Whether it had jurisdiction over Behadar Beg, who lived outside Calcutta.
2. Whether the Qazi and Muftis could be prosecuted for actions done in judicial capacity.

Supreme Court's Ruling:

* It ruled that Behadar was under its jurisdiction due to his indirect Company service.
* It held the Qazi and Muftis liable because, although the Patna Council could judge civil matters, it
couldn't delegate judicial
power to religious officers.
* The Court found the defendants guilty of trespass and assault, awarding *Rs. 30,000* in damages and
*Rs. 9,208-8 annas*
as cost to Naderah.

Aftermath:

* The defendants were jailed for failing to pay the fine; the Qazi died in jail.
* They were released only in 1782 after a bond was executed under the *Act of Settlement, 1781*.
* An appeal in the *Privy Council* in 1781 was dismissed in 1789 for lack of prosecution.
* In 1779, Naderah filed another case, and the Supreme Court again ruled in her favor, condemning the
provincial administration's irregularities.

Significance:

* This case exposed the *confusion of jurisdictions* between Company courts and the Supreme Court.
* It highlighted the *obscurity and corruption* in the provincial judicial system and led to increasing
criticism of Company
administration.

Criminal law
1 There were defects in the Mohammedan law of crimes Which was Formed the law of the land
before British legal reforms and included Heavy reliance on religious doctrines and Quranic rules.
The defects were Ineffective criminal justice system, Allowed pardon by victim’s relatives,
undermining state authority, Absence of uniform standards for intentional vs accidental crimes,
Reliance on ritualistic proof (e.g., four eyewitnesses in adultery).
Under Warren Hastings it was Introduced Adalat system (1772) but still justice was left to Muslim
office He Did not significantly reform criminal law. One of the significant step taken by him was in
1773 Harsher punishment for dacoity introduced.
under Lord Cornwallis there were several reforms Taken like the Abolition of distinction between
types of murder (e.g., injuring vs. drowning) . The Intention was made the key criterion for defining
murder. The right of a kinsman to pardon a murderer was revoked. Punishment of mutilation was
replaced by imprisonment and fines. Circuit Courts were authorized to prosecute even without the
consent of the victim’s kin. Further Reforms in 1797 when the Muslim system of blood money
(Divya) was abolished Abolished the Muslim system of blood money (Divya) and the Offenders
were punished by the state, not by paying the victim’s family
. Regulation VIII of 1798 Abolished the concept of "justifiable murder" under Muslim law and
provided uniform punishment for all cases of willful murder. It Distinguished between intentional
and accidental murder (not recognized in Muslim law)
.In the 1802 (Regulation VI)Infanticide declared as murder punishable by death. The system of
Discretionary Punishments (Tazir) in Mohammedan law Regulated under Regulation LIII of 1803.
and in the same regulation Robbery was made punishable regardless of amount involved. The Law
of Adultery (Regulation XVII of 1817)Reformed to allow proof of adultery by Confession,
Credible testimony, Circumstantial evidence and the system of law which was required four eye-
witnesses was abolished and the punishment was fixed as 30 stripes + 7 years rigorous
imprisonment
. In 1829: Sati system among Hindus was abolished and declared illegal homicide and in 1832:
Muslim law was indirectly abolished by Allowing judges to ignore advice of Muslim law officers
and Giving criminals the option to avoid trial under Muslim law.
However, in Bombay, since the Muslim criminal law was not the law of the land, Hindu,
Muhammadan, and English law were prevalent at the same time. The Hindu and Muslims were
governed by their own laws and the other person by English law. In 1827, Elphinston, the governor
of Bombay, made a code of regulations called the Elphinston's Code, which consolidated the whole
law and remained in force till the IPC was passed in 1860.

Civil law
Although much of the civil law of the native people was left untouched, there were more
complications on this side of law. The reason was that apart from Hindus and Muslims, many other
people such as Parsis, Christians, American Jews also lived in the country from whom there was no
law. The position was very confusing with respect to the people as well as to Hindu and Muslim. In
Presidency Down, the position was different from Mofussil law and at neither place to the position
was clear.
 Presidency Towns
1 Common law and statutory law of Britain as of 1726.ITApplied unless explicitly excluded by
British Parliament or Governor-General. And Adapted to Indian conditions where needed.
2Acts of British Parliament passed in 1726 Applied expressly or by necessary implication post-
1726.
3The regulations made by Governor-General in council
4Personal laws:
• Hindu Law applied to Hindus.
• Mohammedan Law applied to Muslims.
• Inheritance, succession, marriage, and religious practices governed by personal law.
5English law that was Applied to non-Hindus and non-Muslims (e.g., Parsis, Christians, Jews,
etc.).
6 The law of ecclesiastical and admiralty courts in matter concerning those aspects

Law in mofussil ( Covered rural/interior regions outside

Presidency Towns like Bengal,Bihar,orrisa)
Hindu and Mohammedan personal laws:
• Used for disputes involving marriage, inheritance, caste, religious usage.
• Law of the defendant’s religion applied if one party was Hindu or Muslim.
The regulations made by the Provider General and Council were very few. In all the other cases, the
matter was to be decided on the principle of justice, equity, and good conscience, which was
applied from the beginning. The Acts of the British Parliament extended to such areas either
expressly or by necessary implication.

Key Differences:
Aspect Presidency Towns Mofussil (Rural Courts)
Legal Basis English common law + Religious laws + local customs
British statutes
Uniformity More uniform and systematic Fragmented, varied by
community and region
Personal Laws Applied where relevant Applied rigidly, especially by
religion
Applicability to Non- English law Unclear or discretionary
Hindus/Muslims
Judicial Supervision Governor-General & British Local judges with broader
Parliament discretion

Personal law
It explains how Hindu and Muslim personal laws evolved, influenced by religious texts, customs,
and British legislation.
Hindu Personal Laws
 Hindu laws originate from sacred texts like the Vedas, Smritis, and various commentaries. Over
time, statutory laws recognized Hindu customs in legal matters such as inheritance, marriage,
adoption, succession, guardianship, and family obligations.
Muslim Personal Laws
Muslim laws derive from sources including the Holy Quran, teachings of Prophet Muhammad,
Ijma (scholarly consensus), and Kiyas (jurisprudential reasoning). These govern aspects such
as inheritance, wills, marriage, dowry, divorce, guardianship, and pre-emption.
British Influence on Personal Laws
During colonial rule, the British maintained a neutral stance initially, preserving Hindu and
Muslim laws. However, several legislative reforms modified existing laws:
• Caste Disabilities Removal Act, 1850 – Allowed converts to retain property rights.
• Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856 – Legalized widow remarriage.
• Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 – Set minimum marriage age.
• Shariat Act, 1937 & Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 – Strengthened Muslim
women's rights.
• Various inheritance acts – Expanded Hindu women’s rights in property.
While legislation played an important role in the development of Hindu law, an even more
significant role was played by judicial decisions during the colonial period. According to one view,
various principles of English law were introduced into Hindu legal institutions, thereby influencing
its evolution. According to another view, the development of Hindu law was hindered by English
judges who, instead of allowing it to evolve organically, turned it into a rigid system, stripping it of
its original grace, justice, equity, and conscience. A considerable portion of English law was
introduced under this pretext, particularly through Section 9 and 93 of the Regulation of 1781,
which marked the first instance of such legislative interference by the East India Company
(INPEC).
British courts began applying English principles like justice, equity, and good conscience.
• This was often used where no specific personal law rule existed.
• However, the imposition of English legal norms often rigidified Hindu law and stunted
its natural evolution.

THE CODIFICATION OF LAWS

The position of the law as we have stated above was very fluid and uncertain. The courts, the
lawyers, and the people all were in darkness with respect to various forms of law. The
English law whose help was generally taken was itself very uncertain. It was because of the
efforts of Bentham after the reformation of Barniam in 1832, the process of codification and
legislation was started.

The charter act 1833

The Charter Act was passed on 28 august 1833 and it came into force on 23 april,1834. it had
a single centralized legislative authority for all of British India. This body, known as the
Legislative Council, was based in Kolkata (Calcutta) and consisted of the Governor-
 General of India and four members, one of whom was required to be a legal expert (law
member).
The Legislative Council was empowered to make laws for the whole of British India, i.e.,
all territories under the East India Company. However, its laws were subject to review by the
Court of Directors of the East India Company. If the Court signified its disapproval of a
law, the Council was obligated to repeal it.This created a dual control mechanism: central
legislative authority with metropolitan oversight. The Act deprived the Governments of
Madras and Bombay of their independent legislative powers as They could no longer pass
laws on their own. However, they were allowed to submit legislative proposals to the
Governor-General in Council at Calcutta for consideration and enactment.

FIRST LAW COMISSION

It was Constituted under Section 53 of the Charter Act of 1833 and its Chairman was Lord
Thomas Babington Macaulay. The major objectives/or what they were assigned to do were--
• Codification of Criminal Law – to bring uniformity and certainty.
• Review of laws applicable to Anglo-Indians – to address dual systems and conflicts of laws.
• Drafting civil procedure laws – to simplify and rationalize court processes and pleadings.
The Lex Loci Report was one of the most significant products of the First Law Commission.
It aimed to define what laws should apply except in the Hindu and Muslims all in the Mofussil
regions (areas outside Presidency towns like Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras) should be put under
English law (with modifications) where no specified law was applied
The main provision of this act in nutshell----
1English Law Adapted to India
• Where no specific Indian regulation existed, English law (with modifications) should apply.
2Preservation of Local Customs and Usages
• Customary laws, particularly of Hindus and Muslims, were to be respected in personal matters
(e.g., marriage, inheritance).
3Non-Automatic Application of English Statutes
• Only English parliamentary laws enacted post-1726 were potentially applicable, and even
those were not to apply automatically.
4Justice, Equity, and Good Conscience
• Courts were to decide cases based on these principles, interpreted in light of English law.
5English Property Law in Mofussil
• English rules of property were to govern in areas outside Presidency towns where no local law
existed.
6Appeals and Jurisdiction
• Appeals from the Mofussil courts were to lie to the Supreme Court, rather than to the Sadar
Diwani Adalat.
7Status Quo in Pre-existing Legal Matters
• Existing laws and legal situations were not to be disturbed.

Loki report received such a stiff opposition from the government that no action could be taken on it.
The commission was ready to prepare even a digest of English law for India, yet the government
did not accept its recommendation. The acceptance of the report would have been a far-reaching
step, which was never acceptable to the people, nor it was practically possible to follow their
recommendations. The only recommendation of the Commission was accepted in 1850, that was
the Caste Disabilities Removal Act 1850. It ensured that the conversion or laws of caste would not
 result in loss of property rights. This was the only major recommendation implemented due to
strong resistance from Indian society and conservative elements in the British government.

The charter act,1853

The position and composition of the Legislative Council was reformed by the Charter Act of 1853.
It made Lohm a full member of the Governor-General Council and the Legislative Council. The
Act also made provision for appointment of the Law Commission in England to consider the
various reports of the First Law Commission into Regimental Majesty within three years as to how
the Indian law was to be codified.

second law commission

The Second Law Commission was appointed on 29 November 1853 in England that consisted of
members knowing the knowledge of English and Indian laws. The Commission submitted two
important reports. The first one related to the reforms of the judiciary and second related to reforms
in law.
Significance of the Second Law Commission
• Marked a shift from ad hoc legal reforms to a more systematic, long-term legal architecture.
• Its proposals established the foundational structure of modern Indian judiciary and statutory
law.
• Significantly contributed to the institutionalization of codified law in British India, building on
the efforts of the First Law Commission.

Recommendations made by the commission for law reforms were that First, that a substantive civil
law for the whole of India is needed. The English law should be made the basis of such law. The
personal laws of Hindu and Muhammad should not be codified. Such other codification and
consolidation of laws. It proposed -
• Expansion of substantive and procedural codes.
• Elimination of outdated and overlapping regulations.
• Drafting of new codes on civil procedure, contracts, succession, and evidence.

On the recommendation of the Second Law Commission, the Code of Civil Procedure of 1859, the
Indian Penal Code of 1860, Criminal Procedure of 1861, and the Limitation Act of 1859 were
enacted.

Here is an appraisal of the Privy Council and the Federal Court with references to M.P. Singh’s
commentary in V.N. Shukla’s Constitution of India (notably from the chapters on the judicial
system under the Government of India Acts and the evolution of the Supreme Court):

Privy Council and Federal Court: An Appraisal

I. Privy CounciL
Overview the Privy Council as a judicial institution that functioned as the final appellate
authority over Indian legal matters during British rule.
• It was a symbol of legal imperialism, reflecting both the strengths and weaknesses of colonial
jurisprudence.
 Positive Contributions
• the Privy Council:
o Played a progressive role in Hindu and Muslim personal laws.
o Standardized legal principles by importing English common law traditions.
o Ensured rule of law and gave binding force to precedent.
Critique
• critically notes its detachment from Indian social realities, highlighting:
o The inaccessibility for ordinary Indians due to its location in England.
o The lack of cultural sensitivity in some decisions.
o Its colonial nature—serving imperial interests over indigenous justice.
Legacy
• Despite criticisms, credits the Privy Council with laying foundational legal doctrines, many of
which were later adopted by Indian courts post-independence.

II. Federal Court (1937–1950)

Constitutional Basis and Role
• the Federal Court, created under the Government of India Act, 1935, was India’s first attempt
at a constitutional court.
• It had limited original jurisdiction in federal disputes and restricted appellate jurisdiction
over High Courts.
Significance
• the Federal Court marked the beginning of Indian constitutional jurisprudence.
• It contributed to:
o Development of doctrines like ultra vires and division of legislative powers.
o Defending judicial independence in colonial India.
Limitations
• points out that:
o The Federal Court's jurisdiction was narrow.
o It was subordinate to the Privy Council, curbing its authority.
o It could not fully protect fundamental rights, as these were absent before 1950.

III. Comparative Analysis

Feature Privy Council Federal Court
Nature Imperial, foreign apex court Indigenous constitutional court
Accessibility Remote, expensive, London-based Delhi-based, more accessible
Jurisdiction Broad appellate (civil, criminal, Limited original and appellate
constitutional) jurisdiction
Authority Final court until 1949 Subordinate to Privy Council
Contribution Personal law reform, legal consistency Federal constitutional doctrine
Criticism Detached from Indian realities Limited powers and lack of final
authority

IV. Conclusion
while the Privy Council played a crucial role in laying down legal principles, its colonial
character made it unfit for an independent India. The Federal Court, although transitional,
 marked the first step towards an independent judiciary and paved the way for the
establishment of the Supreme Court of India in 1950, which inherited the constitutional
mantle and judicial sovereignty.

HIGH COURT ACT

Historical Background

• Dual Judicial System in British India:

o Supreme Court (Crown’s Court)
o Company’s Court (Sadar Adalat & Provincial Courts)
• This was the situation before the Act came into existence.

Reasons for Establishment

A. Jurisdictional conflicts between Supreme and Company Courts

B. Inconsistent laws and judgments (English vs. Hindu/Muslim/customary)
C. Lack of legal expertise among Company’s judges
D. Administrative inefficiency from managing dual systems

Introduction to the Act

• Enacted by: British Parliament

• Year: 1861
• Authorized by: Queen Victoria
• Key Points:
o Created High Courts in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras
o Merged Supreme Courts and Sadar Adalats
o High Courts held original & appellate jurisdiction
o Judges appointed by the British Crown
o Superintendence over subordinate courts granted

Key Provisions

1. Establishment of High Courts

• Unified Supreme Courts & Sadar Adalats into High Courts

• Jurisdiction: original, appellate, civil, criminal, admiralty, ecclesiastical
• Created under Letters Patent

2. Composition

• Each court had 1 Chief Justice + up to 15 puisne judges

• Appointed by British Crown
 • Included English and Indian judges
• Eligibility:
o 1/3 barristers from England (5+ yrs)
o 1/3 civil servants (10+ yrs, 3 as District Judge)
o Remaining from other experienced legal professionals

3. Jurisdiction & Powers

• Covered civil, criminal, admiralty, probate, testamentary, matrimonial, revenue

• Had original and appellate jurisdiction
• Power to frame procedures and rules

4. Superintendence Over Subordinate Courts

• Uniformity in decisions
• Oversight reduced corruption and inefficiency
• Power of revision to prevent injustice

Impacts of the Act

• Unified dual systems

• Improved efficiency and legal clarity
• Strengthened rule of law in colonial India
• Influenced future judicial reforms

Comparison with Modern Indian Judicial System

1. Foundation for Current System

• Structured High Court system still in place

• Influenced post-independence judiciary

2. Present-Day Role

• Governed by Articles 214–231 of Indian Constitution

• India now has 25 High Courts
• Functions:
o Original & Appellate Jurisdiction
o Writ Jurisdiction (Article 226)
o Supervisory Jurisdiction
o Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Challenges & Criticism

• Did not solve all judicial problems
• Colonial bias in judge appointments
• Limited access to justice for Indians

Morley Minto Reform

Background
The backdrop to the Morley Minto Reforms was a period of heightened political activity
and unrest in India. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw the rise of Indian
nationalism, with the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885, leading the charge for
more significant Indian participation in governance.

Partition of Bengal: The partition of Bengal in 1905 sparked widespread protests and a
surge in nationalist sentiment, which the Indian National Congress backed. To maintain
their rule, the British government recognized the importance of addressing the growing
demands for self-government.
Shimla Deputation: In October 1906, a group of Muslim elites known as the Simla
Deputation, led by the Agha Khan, met with Lord Minto and demanded separate electorates
for Muslims and representation above their numerical strength in light of ‘the value of the
contribution’ Muslims were making ‘to the defense of the empire’.
Gokhale’s Visit to England: Gopal Krishna Gokhale also travelled to England to meet with
Secretary of State for India John Morley and present Congress’ demands for a self-
governing system similar to that of the other British colonies.
Finalization of Reform: The viceroy, Lord Minto, and the Secretary of State for India,
John Morley, agreed that some reforms were needed to appease both the Moderates and the
Muslims. They devised a set of measures known as the Morley-Minto (or Minto-Morley)
Reforms, which were incorporated into the Indian Councils Act of 1909.
Provisions of Indian Councils Act 1909

The Morley-Minto Reforms introduced several key provisions designed to expand Indian
participation in governance. The features of the Indian Councils Act 1909 were as
Expansion of Legislative Councils: The Indian Councils Act 1909 significantly expanded
the size of the legislative councils, both central and provincial. The Central Legislative
Council now had 60 members, up from 16. The number of members in the provincial
legislative councils varied.
Composition of Imperial Legislative Council: According to Sumit Sarkar, of the 69
members of the Imperial Legislative Council, 37 were to be officials, and five were to be
nominated from among the 32 non-officials.
Of the twenty-seven elected non-officials, eight were set aside for Muslims under separate
electorates (where Muslims alone could cast ballots for Muslim candidates), four were set
aside for British capitalists, two for landlords, and thirteen were reserved for the general
electorate.
Introduction of Non-Official Majority: The Indian Councils Act 1909 maintained the
official majority in the Central Legislative Council while allowing the provincial legislative
councils to have a nonofficial majority. However, since some of these non-officials were
nominated but not elected, the overall non-elected majority remained.
Indirect Election of Members: The elected members were to be elected indirectly. Local
bodies were to elect an electoral college, which would elect members of provincial
legislatures, who would then elect members of the central legislature.
Increased Indian Representation: The elective principle was recognized for non-official
council membership in India through Morley Minto Reforms. Indians were allowed to vote
for various legislative councils, but only on the basis of their class and community.
Expansion of Powers: The Indian Councils Act 1909 expanded the deliberative powers of
legislative councils at both levels. Members were able to ask additional questions, move
budget resolutions, and so on. Voting on separate budget items was permitted, but the
budget as a whole could not be voted on.
Indians in Viceroy’s Executive Council: The Indian Councils Act 1909 established (for the
first time) the association of Indians with the executive councils of the Viceroy and
Governor. Satyendra Prasad Sinha was the first Indian to join the Viceroy’s Executive
Council. He was appointed as a Law Member.
Separate Electorates: The Indian Councils Act 1909 established a system of communal
representation for Muslims by accepting the concept of a separate electorate. This meant
that Muslim members could only be elected by Muslim voters. Also, the income
qualification for Muslim voters was kept lower than that for Hindus.
Thus, the Act legalized communalism and Lord Minto became known as the Father of the
Communal Electorate.
Representation for Various Groups: The Indian Councils Act 1909 also allowed for
separate representation for presidency corporations, chambers of commerce, universities,
and zamindars
Morley Minto Reforms Significance
The Morley Minto Reforms (The Indian Councils Act 1909) were crucial in the evolution
of British India’s governance, marking the first significant step towards Indian
representation in legislative councils. The Morley Minto Reforms were significant for the
following reasons:

Increased Representation: The reforms marked the first significant step towards involving
Indians in the legislative process, laying the groundwork for future demands for self-
governance. It was the first time that an Indian was associated with the executive council.
Foundation for a Parliamentary System: The introduction of the electoral principle,
although modest, laid the groundwork for a future parliamentary system in India.
Rise of Nationalism: The Minto Morley reforms of 1909 sparked a new wave of Indian
nationalism as Indians became more politically conscious. This was especially true for
Muslims, who were granted separate electorates as part of the reforms and became more
politically active as a result.
A platform for Grievance Redressal: The inclusion of elected Indian members in legislative
councils provided a new avenue for Indians to express their grievances and concerns,
allowing Indian representatives to critique the executive decisions and suggest
improvements.
Foundation for Future Reforms: The Indian Councils Act 1909 set the stage for future
constitutional reforms, including the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 and the
Government of India Act 1935. It represented the beginning of a gradual shift towards
more inclusive governance, even though the reforms themselves were limited.
Morley Minto Reforms Criticisms
Rise in Communalism: The most controversial aspect of the Morley Minto Reforms was
the introduction of separate electorates for Muslims. This provision was seen as a
deliberate attempt by the British to divide and rule by fostering communal divisions. It
deepened communal tensions and laid the groundwork for future religious and political
conflicts in India.
Limited Political Power: Despite expanding the legislative councils and increasing Indian
representation, the reforms did not grant significant powers to the elected members. The
councils had limited authority, particularly in budgetary and legislative matters, and the
British government retained ultimate control.
Tokenism Rather than Genuine Reform: Critics claimed that the Morley Minto Reforms
were more concerned with appeasing growing Indian political demands than with making
significant changes. The changes were interpreted as an attempt to appease Indian leaders
while maintaining British control over the country.
Diversion from Broader Issues: By emphasizing communal representation, the Morley
Minto Reforms diverted attention away from pressing political and economic issues such as
poverty, illiteracy, and social inequalities.
Morley Minto Reforms Evaluation

The Morley Minto Reforms of 1909 provided no solution to India’s political problem. Lord
Morley stated unequivocally that colonial self-government (as demanded by the Congress)
was not appropriate for India, and he opposed the establishment of a parliamentary or
responsible government in India.

Divide and Rule Policy: The ‘constitutional’ reforms were intended to divide the
nationalist ranks by confusing the Moderates and to prevent the growth of Indian unity
through the obnoxious instrument of separate electorates. The government aimed at
rallying the Moderates and the Muslims against the rising tide of nationalism.
Flawed Measures: Officials and Muslim leaders often spoke of representing the entire
community, but in practice, they only appeased a small Muslim elite. The indirect electoral
system created a complex, ineffective process. Parliamentary forms were introduced, but
without accountability, leading to irresponsible government criticism.
Opportunity for Few: Only a handful, like Gokhale, effectively used council debates to
advocate for universal education, criticize repressive policies, and highlight issues such as
indentured labor. The 1909 Morley-Minto Reforms offered little substance, providing
‘benevolent despotism’ instead of the self-government the people sought

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT,1919

 The context of the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, as a compromise between growing
nationalist demands and imperial control as it was Announced in 1917 by Edwin
Montagu (Secretary of State) as Britain’s policy of gradual development of self-
governing institutions in India.In 1918, Edwin Montagu, the Secretary of State, and Lord
Chelmsford, the Viceroy, produced their scheme of constitutional reforms, known as the
Montagu-Chelmsford (or Mont-Ford) Reforms, which led to the enactment of the
Government of India Act of 1919.The Act introduced a rudimentary form of
constitutionalism, though still under the imperial framework and It was the first formal
step toward Indian participation in governance, especially in the provinces. Yet, it
retained ultimate sovereignty in British hands, reinforcing that India was still a
dependency, not a dominion.

Features of this act

1 the central government
The matters, which were of National importance or related to more than one province were
governed at the central level, such as: Foreign Affairs, Defence, Political Relations,
Communication, Public Debt, Civil and Criminal Laws, Wire services etc. The Central
Legislature was made more powerful and more representative by this Act

EXECUTIVE
The Act made the Governor-General the chief executive authority There had to be the
Executive Council of the Viceroy of eight members, out of which three were to be Indians.
The governor-general could restore cuts in grants, certify bills rejected by the central
legislature and issue ordinances

LEGISLATURE
The Government of India Act, 1919 established a bicameral Central Legislature in
British India for the first time. This legislature, referred to as the Indian Legislature,
consisted of:
• The Governor-General of India, and
• Two Houses:
o The Council of State (Upper House), and
o The Legislative Assembly (Lower House).

• The legislators, under the new reforms, could now ask questions and supplementary, pass
adjournment motions and vote a part of the budget, but 75% of the budget was still not
votable. The legislature had virtually no control over the Governor-General and his
Executive Council.

• COMPOSITION OF LOWER HOUSE

• The Lower House would consist of 145 members, who were either nominated or
indirectly elected from the provinces. It had a tenure of 3 years
• Composition Upper House
• The Upper House would have 60 members. It had a tenure of 5 years and had only male
members.26 nominated34 elected (20 General, 10 Muslims, 3 Europeans and 1 Sikh)
 The members of both Houses were to be either elected or nominated in accordance with
rules framed under the Act. The Act granted the Legislature the power to make laws for
all persons and for all matters within British India, including the authority—subject to
several limitations—to amend or repeal laws enacted by the British Parliament as they
applied to India.
However, in practice, these legislative powers were significantly curtailed. The Governor-
General retained extensive powers, including the ability to:
• Veto any bill, even if passed by both Houses,
• Reserve bills for the consideration of the British Crown,
• Certify a bill as necessary for the safety of the empire and pass it without legislative
approval.
Consequently, real authority remained with the Executive, which was neither
accountable to the Legislature nor bound by its will. The Governor-General and his
Executive Council could override or bypass legislative decisions, highlighting the lack of
responsible government at the central level.
Thus, while the 1919 Act introduced structural reforms and a semblance of legislative
process, the central executive remained autocratic and insulated from representative
accountability, underscoring the limited and illusory nature of constitutionalism in
British India at that stage.

2 PROVINCIAL GOVT
It included the matters which were related to a specific Province such as:
Public Health, Local Self-government, Education, General administration, Medical
facilities, Land-revenue, Water supply, Famine relief, Law and Order, Agriculture etc

PROVINCIAL EXECUTIVE-
Governor
The Governor was the head of the provincial executive. Appointed by the British
Crown, he exercised both executive and legislative powers. He was assisted by an
Executive Council, but his discretionary powers were vast.

MINISTER
ministers were appointed by the Governor from among persons who were not part of
his Executive Council or the official bureaucracy. These ministers were expected to be
elected members of the Provincial Legislature, and if not elected at the time of
appointment, they were required to secure election within six months.
The tenure of ministers was at the pleasure of the Governor, and they were assigned
only the "transferred subjects" under the dyarchy scheme.
While the Governor was generally guided by the advice of the ministers, this guidance
was not binding. He could disregard ministerial advice for sufficient cause, and was
under no legal obligation to act upon it. This made the ministerial role advisory rather
than authoritative.

Dyarchy: Division of Subjects OR DUAL GOVERNMENT

• Provincial subjects were bifurcated into two categories:
 Reserved Subjects Transferred Subjects
Administered by the Governor and his Administered by Indian Ministers
Executive Council (British officials appointed from among elected members.
only).
Included: law and order, justice, police, Included: education, public health, local
land revenue, irrigation. self-government, agriculture, industries.
Reasons for Failure of Dyarchy:
1. Absence of Collective Responsibility
o Ministers were not collectively answerable to the legislature, undermining
parliamentary principles.
2. Financial Constraints
o Ministers lacked control over financial resources, which remained under
reserved subjects like finance and revenue.
3. Non-Cooperation of Civil Servants
o British civil servants were loyal to the Governor, not the ministers, leading to
administrative resistance.
4. Mutual Interference
o Overlap between reserved and transferred subjects caused constant friction.
5. Lack of Infrastructure and Staff
o Ministers lacked proper office space, secretarial support, and institutional
authority.
6. Absence of a Strong Party System
o There was no organized political party framework to ensure coordinated
policy-making or legislative support.

the Preamble to the 1919 Act expressed an intention toward progressive self-
government, the actual system proved impractical and ineffective, and was widely
regarded as a failure. This failure paved the way for the introduction of provincial
autonomy without dyarchy under the Government of India Act, 1935

PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE
IT consisted of a unicameral Legislative Council in each province. The Council was
composed of:
• Members of the Governor’s Executive Council, and
• Elected and nominated members, as determined by rules framed under the Act.
The elected members were chosen through a highly restricted franchise based on
property, education, and taxation qualifications, and were organized to represent
various religious, community, and special interests—a system that institutionalized
communal representation The Governor had the power to: Dissolve the Council before
the end of its normal term, and Extend its tenure by one year, beyond the original three-
year term, in special circumstances Despite the appearance of representative governance,
the Provincial Legislature's powers remained limited, as significant subjects (e.g., law and
order, finance) were still under the control of the Governor and his Executive Council
through the reserved list of subjects
The inherent weaknesses of dyarchy—marked by the partial transfer of power, overlapping
responsibilities, and a lack of genuine self-governance—contributed to the failure of the
Government of India Act of 1919. This failure made it necessary for the British
government to address Indian leaders' growing demands for authentic reforms, setting the
stage for the more comprehensive and forward-looking Government of India Act of 1935
British Crown
│
▼
Governor-General of India
(Executive Head; Appointed by Crown)
│
┌────────────────────┼────────────────────┐
▼ ▼
Executive Council Indian Legislature
(British Officials) (Bicameral)
│
┌─────────────────────────────────┴
──────────────────────────────────┐
▼ ▼
Council of State (Upper House) Legislative Assembly (Lower
House)
────────────────────────────────
─────────────────────────────────────
• Members: ~60 (fixed by rules) • Members: ~145 (varied
by province)
• Indirectly elected + nominated • ~70% Elected; others
nominated
• 5-year term • 3-year term
• Limited franchise • Franchise based on tax,
property, education
• Permanent body • Subject to dissolution
• President: Governor-General • Speaker elected by the
House

▲
│
Governor-General’s Powers
───────────────────────────────────────────────
• Power to summon, prorogue, dissolve legislature
• Veto bills (absolute or reserved)
• Issue ordinances
• Control over finances and military
 Government of India act 1935

There were growing dissatisfaction with the Government of India Act, 1919, which
failed to establish responsible governance and retain public confidence. The widespread
non-cooperation movement and civil unrest highlighted the people's discontent. In
response, the British Government appointed the Simon Commission in 19, which
submitted its report in 1930. However, the Commission recommended no significant
constitutional changes, particularly rejecting demands for federalism and responsible
government, further alienating Indian political leadership. At the same time, the Nehru
Report (1928) articulated Indian demands for dominion status, a federal structure, and
responsible government. Notably, the Indian princely states also expressed willingness
to join a federation. To deliberate on these constitutional issues, three Round Table
Conferences were held in London between 1930 and 1932. Though the first two ended in
failure, the third conference led to a consensus on key principles.
The outcome was compiled in a White Paper consisting of 202 paragraphs, proposing:
• A federation of India, including British India and princely states,
• Provincial autonomy, and
A responsible government at the center, though with certain limitations. Based on the
recommendations of a Joint Parliamentary Committee, the Government of India Act,
1935 was drafted and passed by the British Parliament. It received Royal Assent on 2
August 1935, laying the foundation for the constitutional structure of late colonial India.

Basic features of federalism-

1 basic division of units

India was to be divided into:
o Provinces (British Indian territories),
o Princely States (Indian States under treaty obligations).
• All units were to be treated as equal components in the proposed federation.
2. Provincial Autonomy
• Provinces were to have uniform constitutional status.
• Governors were to function with ministers responsible to elected legislatures.
• However, provincial autonomy was limited by the overriding powers of the Governor
and the Centre.
3. Instrument of Accession
4. Distribution of Legislative Powers
• Legislative subjects were divided into:
o Federal List (exclusive to Centre),
o Provincial List (exclusive to Provinces),
o Concurrent List (shared between Centre and Provinces).
• Residuary powers were vested in the Governor-General (Centre).
5. Lack of Responsible Government at the Centre
• The central executive was not responsible to the legislature.
• The Governor-General retained overriding powers, including veto and ordinance-
making powers.
6. Central Control over Provinces
• The Centre had significant administrative, legislative, and financial control over
Provinces.
• The Governor-General could override provincial decisions in key matters.
7. Legislative Structure
• Proposed bicameral federal legislature:
o Council of State (Upper House) – Directly elected members.
o Federal Assembly (Lower House) – Indirectly elected members.
• However, this structure never came into full operation.
8. Precondition for Federal Setup
• Federation would only come into existence if at least 50% of the Indian princely states
(about 300) agreed to join.
• Since this condition was never fulfilled, the federal part of the Act remained
inoperative.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
1EXCEUTIVE
2 LEGISLATURE
3FEDERAL COURT
1 Executive
Governor-General IT Acts with a Council of Ministers. THE Powers OF governor general in key
areas (external affairs, defense, ecclesiastical affairs, tribal areas).It Could override ministers in
matters of “special responsibility.”
2. Legislature (Bicameral Federal Legislature)
• (a) The King – Represented by Governor-General
• (b) Council of State (Upper House)
o 156 members (British India: 104, Indian States: 52)
o Permanent House; 1/3rd members retire every 3 years.
• (c) Legislative Assembly (Lower House)
o 250 members (British India: 125, Indian States: 125)
o 5-year term unless dissolved earlier.
o Greater power in financial matters.
• Elections – On communal basis, proportional representation.
3. Judiciary
• Federal Court (Delhi)
o Composition: Chief Justice + 6 Judges
o Jurisdictions:
• Original – Disputes between units or involving constitutional interpretation.
• Appellate – Against High Court judgments (certified cases).
• Advisory – Governor-General could seek opinion on important legal questions.
o Appeals: Could go to Privy Council in London.

The structure was contingent on at least 50% of princely states joining (approx.
300).Never fully came into operation as the condition wasn't met.

Provincial government
The Executive
• The executive authority in the provinces was vested in the Governor and his Council of
Ministers.
• The Governor had powers similar to those of the Governor-General, including reserved
powers, which allowed him to act independently in certain matters.
The Legislature
• The structure of provincial legislatures varied as Some provinces had unicameral legislatures
(only a Legislative Assembly).
And Others had bicameral legislatures (Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council).
• Legislative Assembly:
o Members were directly elected on communal and general constituencies.
• Legislative Council:
o Members were either elected or nominated by the Governor.
o It was a permanent body with one-third of members renewed every three years.
• The right to vote was limited based on property and education qualifications, with only about
14% of the population eligible.

Working of the Government of India Act, 1935

Aspect Provincial Level Central Level
Autonomy Provinces were granted autonomy. A federation was proposed but
never materialized due to princely
states’ refusal.
Diarchy Abolished — full powers transferred Introduced — subjects divided into
to elected ministers (in theory). Reserved (under British) and
Transferred.
Executive Governor with Council of Ministers. Governor-General with Executive
Council (dominated by British
officials).
Legislature Unicameral or bicameral depending Bicameral federal legislature was
on the province. proposed.
Governor’s Role Could override ministers using Governor-General had absolute
discretionary powers. control over defense, foreign affairs,
etc.
Ministerial Ministers responsible to provincial No real ministerial responsibility at
Responsibility legislature (limited by governor’s the Centre; Governor-General was
powers). supreme.
Elections Held for legislative assemblies; Federal elections never held as
limited franchise (~14% could federation wasn’t implemented.
vote).
Judiciary Provincial High Courts retained. Federal Court of India was
established in 1937.
Financial Powers Limited – major taxes and revenue Central control over major finances.
controlled by the Centre.
Impact Enabled some Indian participation Failed to create real federal
in governance. structure; retained British
dominance.

Accession of Princely States (1947–1949)

At the time of India's independence in 1947, there were over 500 princely states, which
were semi-autonomous under Bri4sh rule. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 gave
these states the op4on to join either India or Pakistan, or remain independent. However,
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the then Deputy Prime Minister, played a pivotal role in
ensuring that most of the princely states acceded to India. Patel used a mix of diplomacy,
persuasion, and in some cases, military force to integrate these states. Notable states that
resisted accession, such as Hyderabad and Junagarh, were eventually brought into the
Indian Union through military ac4on, while others like Jammu and Kashmir acceded under
specific condi4ons

The successful integra4on of these princely states into India was a monumental task, as it
prevented the poten4al fragmenta4on of India into mul4ple independent states, which
could have undermined na4onal unity and security

Reorganizing of States (1956)

 The integra4on of princely states into India was followed by demands for the
reorganiza4on of states based on linguis4c and cultural iden44es. Ini4ally, the states were
grouped based on historical and administra4ve factors. However, this led to movements
in several regions calling for states that represented specific linguis4c groups.

In response to these growing demands, the Indian government formed the States
Reorganisa4on Commission (SRC) in 1953. The SRC recommended the reorganiza4on of
states primarily on linguis4c lines. This led to the passage of the States Reorganisa4on Act
in 1956, which created new states and redrew boundaries, reducing the number of states
from 27 to 14. This act also led to the aboli4on of the categories of Part A, Part B, and Part
C states and resulted in the crea4on of Union Territories.

These efforts to integrate and reorganize states helped consolidate India's territorial unity
and catered to its diverse linguis4c and cultural identities.

Indian independence act,1947

1. Cripps Mission (1942)

• IT was Sent by the British during World War II, led by Sir Stafford Cripps. Proposed
Dominion status after the war and A Constituent Assembly to frame the constitution .
Its Provinces could opt out of the union but Congress rejected it (wanted full
independence); Muslim League rejected it (no separate Pakistan).

2. Wavell Plan (1945)

It was Proposed by Lord Wavell, then Viceroy of India.
It Called for Reconstitution of Executive Council with only Indian members (except the
Viceroy) , Equal representation for Hindus and Muslims. Convening a conference at
Shimla to discuss the plan (Shimla Conference) but it Failed due to disagreements between
Congress and Muslim League.

3. Cabinet Mission Plan (1946)

It was Sent by British PM Attlee; included Cripps, Pethick-Lawrence, and Alexander.
It Aimed to ensure Indian unity and transfer power. It Proposed A Union of India
(control over foreign affairs, defense, and communications)Grouping of provinces into
three sections (A, B, C)and Formation of a Constituent Assembly. Congress accepted
conditionally; Muslim League withdrew and launched Direct Action Day.

4. Mountbatten Plan (1947)

It was Proposed by Lord Mountbatten, last British Viceroy. It accepted the reality of
Partition, Provinces were to choose between India and Pakistan, Boundary
Commissions created to draw borders and Led to the Indian Independence Act, 1947.
The Indian Independence Act was passed by the British Parliament within less than a
fortnight and got Royal Assent on 18 July 1947. The Act came into force on 15 August
1947, bringing to an end 182 years of British rule in this country, with the colorful
ceremony in which Lord Mountabbin himself was known as the first Governor-General of
Free India.

The main provisions of the Act were as given below.

1. *Creation of Two Dominions: India and Pakistan were to become two independent
dominions from **15th August 1947*.

2. *Territorial Division*: The Indian Dominion would include all British Indian provinces
except those that made up Pakistan (East Bengal, West Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan, and
NWFP).

3. *Indian States' Choice*: Princely States could choose to join either India or Pakistan.

4. *Governor-General*: Each Dominion would have a Governor-General appointed by the

British King.

5. *Legislative Powers*: Both Dominions’ legislatures had full power to make laws, and
British laws would not apply unless adopted.

6. *End of British Responsibility*: From 15th August 1947, the UK government no longer
held responsibility for the governance of British India.

7. *End of British Paramountcy*: The Crown’s suzerainty over Indian States and all
treaties with them would lapse.

8. *Legislative Powers*: The Dominion legislatures were to exercise full authority within
their territories.

9. *Constitutional Basis*: Until new Constitutions were adopted, the Government of India
Act, 1935 (with modifications), would be used.

10. *Governor-General's Powers*: The Governor-General was empowered to take

necessary steps to implement the Act.

This Act laid the groundwork for the ConsJtuJon of India (1950) and the ConsJtuJon of
Pakistan (1956), as it empowered the Constituent Assemblies to draft and adopt
constitution The Indian Independence Act introduced a mechanism to manage the transfer
of power, including the transfer of administrative roles, legal jurisdictions, and the
distributor of government assets. British law ceased to apply to the two dominions post-
independence, which led to the creation of separate judicial systems in both nation.The
Act was eventually repealed in India with the enactment of the ConsJtuJon of India on
January 26, 1950, and in Pakistan with the ConsJtuJon of Pakistan on March 23, 1956.
 The Indian Independence Act of 1947 remains significant as it legally recognized the end
of British colonial rule and laid the foundation for India and Pakistan as sovereign nations

Partition of Bengal (1905)

It was Announced on July 20, 1905 and Came into effect: October 16, 1905 . This movement
was initiated by Lord Curzon, the Viceroy of India
• The British divided Bengal into:
o East Bengal and Assam (Muslim-majority)
o West Bengal (Hindu-majority)
o Due to the Administrative convenience – Bengal was too large to govern
effectively.
But there real motive was to Divide and rule: To weaken the growing nationalist
movement by creating religious division between Hindus and Muslims.

Swadeshi Movement (1905–1911)

It started as A reaction to the Partition of Bengal.
Meaning of Swadeshi “Of one’s own country” – promoting indigenous goods and
industries.
Key Leaders: Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai (Extremists) and
Aurobindo Ghosh, Rabindranath Tagore (cultural support)
The Main Features of this movement were-
1. Boycott of British goods
2. Promotion of Indian (Swadeshi) products
3. National education (setting up Indian-managed schools and colleges)
4. Public protests, processions, and picketing
5. Revival of Indian art, literature, and culture
Tagore’s Role as he Composed songs and tied Rakhi to promote unity
between Hindus and Muslims.

Outcome of this movement were

-Widespread national awaken
-Partition annulled in 1911 due to strong opposition and unrest
' -Strengthened nationalist movement and led to the rise of Extremist leaders

Indian National congress

 1 Background of inc
The founding of the Indian National Congress in 1885 was not a sudden event. It
was the culmination of political, economic, and social developments dating back to
the 1860s. There were many key events like the-
• Famines in the 1860s–1870s: Recurrent famines led to massive deaths and economic
hardship, exposing colonial neglect.
• Colonial legislation: British laws widened the gap between rulers and the Indian
population.
• Ilbert Bill Controversy (1883): A proposal allowing Indian judges to try British
offenders was defeated, sparking anger and the realization that organized effort was
needed.

2. Socio-Religious Reform Movements

Several reform movements laid the foundation for political awakening:
Brahmo Samaj (founded in 1828 by Raja Ram Mohan Roy):
• Criticized British policies.
• Fought for freedom of the press and abolition of sati.
• Advocated modern education and religious reform.
Arya Samaj (founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati):
• Called for return to Vedic values.
• Promoted Swadeshi and national pride.
• Leaders like Lala Lajpat Rai continued his work after 1883.
Ramakrishna Mission (founded by Swami Vivekananda in 1896):
• Promoted spiritual unity, service, and national consciousness.
• Centered at Belur Math, near Calcutta.

3. Early Political Associations

Before the INC, several regional associations tried to represent Indian interests but
lacked national influenced

4. Foundation of Indian National Congress (INC)

It was founded: December 28, 1885. its First session that was held at Gokaldas
Tejpal Sanskrit College, Bombay . The Founder was Allan Octavian Hume, a
retired British civil servant , the First President: Womesh Chandra Banerjee .
It was Attended by 72 delegates, mostly from Bombay and Madrass including
British members: William Wedderburn, John Jardine. INC was created by Hume
as a “safety valve” to release growing Indian frustration peacefully and was
Supported by leaders like Lala Lajpat Rai and some Marxist historians. Modern
historians, like Bipan Chandra, reject this view. They argue that INC was a
genuine political expression of a politically aware class and Hume was only a
catalyst

5 Objectives of INC (Early Phase)

 • Promote secular, democratic nationalism
• Politically educate the masses
• Build an all-India leadership
• Raise awareness about British exploitation
• Demand Indianization of civil services, more representation in councils
• Develop anti-colonial ideology
• Foster national unity across religions, castes, and regions

6 Ideological Foundations
Pre-1920 Congress thought was influenced by Western liberal thinkers like Milton,
Burke, J.S. Mill, Macaulay, Spence . But Over time, Indian philosophy, Gandhism, and
socialist ideas were integrated.

7 Significance of INC
The birth of INC marked a turning point in India’s political history . As it Gave a shape
to a national movement and Provided a unifying political platform. It Became the
central force in the Indian independence movement from 1885 to 1947.The Indian
National Congress emerged from a complex mix of economic hardship, colonial
oppression, social reform, and political awareness. It evolved from a moderate body
seeking reforms to the vanguard of India’s freedom struggle.

Comparison Table: Evolution of Indian National

Congress
Phase Time Nature/Ideology Key Leaders Major
Period Events/Movements
Moderate 1885– Constitutional Dadabhai Formation of INC,
Phase 1905 reforms, petitions Naoroji, G.K. Demand for reforms,
Gokhale, W.C. Drain Theory
Banerjee
Extremist 1905– Assertive nationalism, B.G. Tilak, Lala Partition of Bengal,
Phase 1919 Swadeshi, agitation Lajpat Rai, B.C. Swadeshi Movement,
Pal Surat Split
Gandhian 1919– Non-violence, mass Mahatma Non-Cooperation, Civil
Phase 1947 mobilization Gandhi, Nehru, Disobedience, Quit India
Patel, Azad,
Bose
Post- 1947– Democratic Nehru, Indira Constitution framing,
Independence present governance, economic Gandhi, Rajiv Green Revolution,
planning Gandhi Liberalization

Timeline Chart: Key Events in INC History

1885 ─────────────► Indian National Congress founded (W.C. Banerjee President)
1905 ─────────────► Partition of Bengal; Start of Swadeshi Movement
1907 ─────────────► Surat Split: Moderates vs Extremists
1919 ─────────────► Jallianwala Bagh Massacre; Gandhi emerges as leader
1920 ─────────────► Non-Cooperation Movement
1930 ─────────────► Civil Disobedience Movement & Dandi March
1935 ─────────────► Government of India Act
1942 ─────────────► Quit India Movement
1947 ─────────────► Indian Independence; INC becomes ruling party
1950 ─────────────► India becomes Republic under INC leadership (Nehru PM)
1975 ─────────────► Emergency declared by Indira Gandhi
1991 ─────────────► Economic Liberalization under INC (P.V. Narasimha Rao)

Moderates vs Extremists (1885–1917)

Aspect Moderates Extremists
Period 1885–1905 (Early phase of Congress) 1905–1917 (Rise after Partition of
Bengal)
Leaders Dadabhai Naoroji, Gopal Krishna Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra
Gokhale, M.G. Ranade Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai
Approach Constitutional, peaceful, petition-based Radical, assertive, mass mobilization
Methods Prayers, petitions, speeches, deputations Boycotts, swadeshi, passive
resistance, protests
Goal Greater share in governance, Swaraj (complete self-rule)
administrative reforms
View of Believed in the fairness of British justice Saw British rule as exploitative and
British Rule and reforms oppressive
Base of Educated elite, urban middle class Youth, students, broader masses,
Support small business class
Famous Quote “India must be ruled according to Indian “Swaraj is my birthright and I shall
needs.” – Gokhale have it.” – Tilak

NON CO-OPERATION MOVEMENT

During the years 1920-21, the Indian National Movement entered a new phase of mass politics and
mobilization. Two mass movements, Khilafat and Non-Cooperation, were formed to oppose British
rule. The Non-Cooperation Movement was launched by Mahatma Gandhi in 1920 to mobilize the
Indian masses to peacefully resist British rule through non-cooperation with British institutions,
laws, and policies. Both the Khilafat Movement and Mahatma Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation
Movement saw a convergence at the end of the summer of 1920.Gandhi, through his earlier
localized movements such as Champaran, Kheda and Ahmedabad, had already gained popularity
and was able to attract the masses throughout the country. Thus transitioning to a new era of
nationwide movement and mass politics

causes of Non-Cooperation Movement

The causes of the Non-Cooperation Movement were multifaceted. The impact of the First World
War, the Rowlatt Act, the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, and the Montagu-Chelmsford
Reforms provided the immediate context for the movement.

Simmering dissent: The economic exploitation of India by the British colonial rulers had
already impoverished the masses. The economic and political situation of the country
during and after the First World War was further aggravated by rising high inflation, heavy
taxation and forced cultivation of cash crops.
First World War: The British government backtracked on its promises to consider
nationalist demands in exchange for Indian support in the War, which shattered the
political optimism of the War years.
Montagu-Chelmsford reforms: The reforms introduced by the British government through
the Montagu-Chelmsford in the form of the Government of India Act 1919 fell short of
Indian aspirations for self-governance and responsible government. The vast majority of
leaders called it “disappointing and unsatisfactory.”
Rowlatt Act: It was passed in 1919 that allowed for the arrest and detention of Indians
without trial. Its primary goal was to imprison nationalists without allowing them to defend
themselves. This had infuriated the nationalists and other leaders. Gandhi decided to use
Satyagraha to oppose it.
Jallianwala Bagh Massacre: The Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in Amritsar, in which British
troops opened fire on a peaceful gathering of Indians, killing hundreds, shocked and
enraged the Indian population.
Khilafat Movement: The Khilafat Movement was a parallel movement initiated by Indian
Muslims to protest against the dismantling of the Ottoman Caliphate by the British after the
First World War. Gandhi supported the Khilafat cause and advocated for non-cooperation.

As a follow-up to the Rowlatt Act, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, and the Khilafat
Movement, Mahatma Gandhi announced his intention to begin Non-Cooperation with the
Government. At a special session in Calcutta in September 1920, Congress approved a
Non-Cooperation Movement until the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs were corrected and
Swaraj was established. The programmed of non-cooperation was accepted and endorsed
without opposition in the Nagpur INC Session of December 1920.

Non-Cooperation Movement Features

The Non-Cooperation Movement, launched by Mahatma Gandhi in 1920, was a significant
phase in the Indian independence struggle. The following are some key features:

Non-violent Protest: The movement emphasized non-violence and civil disobedience.

Surrender of Titles and Honorary Positions: Individuals were encouraged to surrender their
titles and honorary positions conferred by the British government.
Resignation from Government Positions and Local Bodies: People were urged to resign
from government jobs and memberships of local bodies.
Boycott of Foreign Goods: Indians were encouraged to boycott British goods and use only
Indian-made products. Foreign-made clothing was gathered and set ablaze.
Boycott of Elections: Indians were asked to boycott elections held in accordance with the
provisions of the 1919 Act, as well as legislative councils (though there were differences
over this boycott).
Non-cooperation with Government Institutions: This included boycotting courts,
government functions, and legal practices, as well as government schools and colleges.
Refusal to Serve in the British Army: People were encouraged not to serve in the British
army.
Non-payment of Taxes: If the above steps did not yield results, people were prepared to
refuse to pay taxes.
Promotion of Swadeshi Principles: The movement promoted the adoption of Swadeshi
principles, including hand spinning and weaving (Charkha and Khadi). Thousands of
volunteers went door-to-door persuading people to adopt Swadeshi goods.
Boycott Movement Against Liquor and Toddy Shops: The boycott extended to liquor and
toddy shops.
Establishment of National Institutions: National schools, colleges, and private panchayat
courts were established. Institutions like Kashi Vidyapeeth, Bihar Vidyapeeth, and Jamia
Millia Islamia were founded.
Unity of Congress and Muslim League: The movement saw a rare unity between the
Indian National Congress and the Muslim League.
Maintenance of Hindu-Muslim Unity and Strict Non-violence: There was a focus on
maintaining Hindu-Muslim unity and practicing strict non-violence.
Jail Bharo Andolan: Congress volunteers promoted the Charkha and Khadi and
participated in the “Jail Bharo Andolan” (fill the jails movement).
Tilak Swaraj Fund: Gandhi announced the Tilak Swaraj Fund, which aimed at collecting
Rs 1 crore to aid constructive work.

Influence in particular regions

Region Key Events & Leaders
Bengal Birendranath Sasmal led anti-union board agitation in Contai and
Tamluk (Midnapore).
Assam J.M. Sengupta led strikes in tea plantations, steamer services, Assam-
Bengal Railways.
United Baba Ram Chandra led agrarian riots in Rae Bareli, Pratapgarh, Fyzabad,
Province Sultanpur; Eka movement (Madari Pasi); Kisan Sabha active in Awadh.
Punjab Akali movement for Gurudwara reform; showed communal unity among
Sikhs, Muslims, and Hindus.
Rajasthan Peasant protests against cesses and begar; Bijolia and Bhil movements
(Motilal Tejawat).
Gujarat Vallabhbhai Patel promoted non-cooperation as alternative to
revolutionary methods.
Karnataka Largely unaffected; limited support from upper/middle-class
professionals.
Madras Textile workers (Buckingham & Carnatic mills) went on strike; local
(Chennai) leaders gave moral support.
Andhra Tribals & peasants (e.g., Chirala-Perala) refused taxes; Alluri Sitaram
Raju united tribal demands with the movement.
Tamil Nadu Movement led by C. Rajagopalachari, S. Satyamurthy, Periyar E.V.R.
Kerala Anti-Jemni peasant struggles; intense Mopillah revolt.

Non-Cooperation Movement Withdrawal

The non-cooperation movement was one of the most powerful movements in the Indian
freedom struggle. However, despite all efforts, it was called off by Gandhiji due to various
reasons. These reasons include:

Chauri-Chaura Incident: In Chauri-Chaura, Uttar Pradesh, a group of protestors attacked

and set fire to a police station, resulting in the death of several police officers. Gandhi felt
that the incident violated the principle of non-violence, and as a result, he called off the
movement in February 1922.
Lack of discipline and violence: Mahatma Gandhi realised that the Indian masses were not
fully prepared for a nationwide struggle of civil disobedience and non-cooperation.There
were instances of indiscipline and violence by some participants. For instance,
the Mopillah revolt in Kerala turned violent.
Abolishment of Caliphate: Khilafat, one of the non-cooperation movement’s issues, lost its
relevance. Turks themselves, under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal, first abolished the
Ottoman sultanate in 1922 and then did away with the office of the Khalifa in 1924.
Rise of militancy: Towards the later stages of the movements, there was a gradual shift
towards more radical and militant approaches. This led to a loss of popular support and
alienation of certain sections of society.
Issue of class revolution: The Non-Cooperation Movement was gradually turning into a
no-rent movement against the Zamindars. However, the Congress leadership had no
intention of undermining the Zamindars’ legal rights. Gandhi’s goal was a “controlled mass
movement” involving various Indian classes rather than a class revolution. As a result, he
was opposed to the continuation of this movement, which could lead to a class revolution.
Government repression: The British colonial government had responded to the Non-
Cooperation Movement with harsh measures. The government seemed in no mood for
negotiations. Volunteer corps were declared illegal, public meetings were forbidden, the
press was silenced, and most leaders of the Congress were arrested.

Non-Cooperation Movement Significance

Though the non-cooperation movement did not succeed and was suddenly called off, it had
a significant impact on the Indian freedom struggle. It played a significant role
in generating and spreading anti-imperialist consciousness among Indian people.
Hindu-Muslim unity: Gandhi opined that the realisation of Swarajya lies in the proper
resolution of the Mahomedan question. This effort led to an unprecedented Hindu-Muslim
unity, reflected in the ensuing mass mobilisations against colonial rule. It also paved the
way for Gandhi to become the main protagonist of secularism.
Issue of social justice: The non-cooperation movement introduced the issue of caste
discrimination and untouchability to national politics and made Gandhi an important leader
for social justice.
Mass participation: The Khilafat and NCM witnessed extensive participation from the
Indian masses from all walks of life, including peasants, workers, students, teachers,
women and professionals. The long-standing grievances of the working masses against the
British, as well as the Indian masters, were given an outlet through this movement.
Gandhi’s emphasis on non-violence introduced women in large numbers into the freedom
struggle. Thus, it proved to be a mass mobilisation in the true sense.
National consciousness: The most significant success of the movement was the creation
of political and social consciousness and nationalism in Indians.
Inspiration for subsequent movements: The success and impact of these movements paved
the way for subsequent movements such as the Civil Disobedience Movement and the Quit
India Movement.

Non-Cooperation Movement Limitations

The Non-Cooperation Movement was a significant step in India’s struggle for
independence. However, it had several limitations and challenges that impacted its
effectiveness.
Merger of Khilafat issue: The cause of the Khilafat movement was exclusively on the
religious line, and then the convergence of NCM and Khilafat proved to be less useful for
secular politics in India in the long term.
Limited reach: While the Non-Cooperation Movement garnered substantial support,
especially in urban areas, it did not have universal backing across India. The rural
population had limited awareness of these movements and often remained detached.
Lack of clear goal: The movements didn’t have a well-defined roadmap beyond non-
cooperation with the British for achieving independence or addressing broader socio-
economic issues.
Differences: There were differences in strategies, ideologies, and priorities that led to
fragmentation and weakened the overall effectiveness of the movements. For example,
there were differences regarding the boycott of legislative councils. Some leaders, such
as C.R. Das, were unwilling to include a council boycott.

Civil disobedience movement

Civil Disobedience Movement(1930) is regarded as the second major mass movement and
a distinct advancement in widening the social reach of India’s struggle for freedom after
the Non-Cooperation Movement. Known also as Salt Satyagraha, it was also the first time
when Congress put the objective of complete independence to the British authority as well
as to the Indian masses.

The Civil Disobedience Movement was formally launched by Mahatma Gandhi on 6 April
1930 by breaking salt law after his historic Dandi March. It was followed by the
widespread arrest of national leaders throughout the nation.

Background of Civil Disobedience Movement

The primary factors that contributed to the conditions for the Civil Disobedience
Movement included protests against the arrest of revolutionary leaders, India’s pursuit of
its constitution, and a growing demand for complete independence following the rejection
of Dominion status as proposed in the Nehru Report.

Calcutta Session (1928): Endorsed the Nehru Report and demanded Dominion status. A
clash between factions led to a one-year grace period for the British to grant Dominion
status by December 31, 1929, or face a Civil Disobedience Movement.
Irwin’s Declaration (October 1929): Viceroy Lord Irwin promised Dominion status and a
Round Table Conference post-Simon Commission’s report. The lack of a timeline
frustrated Congress, leading to the Purna Swaraj resolution.
Delhi Manifesto (November 2, 1929): National leaders outlined prerequisites for attending
the Round Table Conference: immediate adoption of Dominion status, majority Congress
representation, and amnesty for political prisoners.
Lahore Session (1929) and Purna Swaraj: Irwin rejected the Delhi Manifesto’s demands.
Jawaharlal Nehru led the session, emphasizing Purna Swaraj. Key decisions included
declaring complete independence, hoisting the tricolor on December 31, 1929, boycotting
Round Table Conferences, taking the Independence Day pledge on January 26, 1930, and
launching the Civil Disobedience Movement under Gandhi.

Gandhi’s Eleven Demands

Gandhi’s demands were a compromise formula that appealed to a wide range of political
opinions. He gave the British until January 31, 1930, to accept or reject the demands. If the
demands were not met by March 11, Gandhi threatened civil disobedience

Launch of Civil Disobedience Movement

With no response from the government regarding the 11 demands, Gandhi decided to
launch the Civil Disobedience Movement. Among all the demands, he chose to violate
the salt law because the British were inhumanely taxing this basic necessary item and had
a near monopoly over it. It was a brilliant plan, though only a few could grasp its
significance at the time of its announcement.

Dandi March
Gandhi announced the ‘Dandi March’ after informing Irwin in advance that he would break
the salt laws. Gandhi and his 78 supporters started the march from Ahmedabad to the
Dandi coast on March 12, 1930, and reached it on April 5, 1930. He broke the salt
regulations on April 6 and, thus, officially started the Civil Disobedience Movement.
Form of protest, Breaking of salt laws, Picketing of liquor and foreign cloth shops ,
Refusing to pay taxes , Giving up law practice , Boycotting courts by refraining
from litigation , Resignation by government servants from their posts , Adherence to
the truth and non-violence as means to attain swaraj , Obedience of the local leaders after
Gandhi’s arrest, Civil Disobedience Movement TimeLine, Induced by Gandhi’s
extraordinary endeavors at Dandi, defiance of the salt laws spread throughout the country,
Gandhi-Irwin Pact
The Gandhi-Irwin Pact was an agreement signed on March 5, 1931, between Gandhi and
Lord Irwin, the then Viceroy of India. It marked the end of the Civil Disobedience
Movement’s first phase.
The key provisions included the release of political prisoners, the right to make salt for
personal use, and the withdrawal of ordinances against civil disobedience. In return,
Gandhi agreed to suspend the movement and attend the Second Round Table Conference in
London.
Karachi Session, 1931.The Karachi Session of the Congress held in March 1931 aimed to
endorse the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. During this session, resolutions were passed endorsing the
Delhi Pact, reiterating the goal of Purna Swaraj. This session marked a crucial moment
aligning Congress with the agreements made under the Gandhi-Irwin Pact.

Civil Disobedience Movement – Regional Overview

Region Key Leaders Major Events / Features
Gujarat Mahatma Gandhi Launched the Salt Satyagraha with the
Dandi March (1930); inspired
nationwide protests.
Maharashtra K. F. Nariman, V. D. Mass protests in cities; women
Savarkar, and others participated in large numbers.
Bengal Subhas Chandra Bose, Hartals, salt satyagraha, and defiance
Jatindra Mohan Sengupta of forest laws.
United Provinces Jawaharlal Nehru, Govind Salt production, picketing of liquor
Ballabh Pant shops, refusal to pay taxes.
Punjab Lala Lajpat Rai Moderate participation; protests against
(inspirational influence) British repression.
Assam Gopinath Bordoloi Participation of tea plantation workers;
boycott of British goods.
Andhra Pradesh Duggirala Gopalkrishna, Salt Satyagraha at coastal towns like
Konda Venkatappayya Machilipatnam.
Tamil Nadu C. Rajagopalachari Led Salt March from Trichinopoly to
Vedaranyam (Salt Satyagraha).
Kerala K. Kelappan, K. P. Kesava Salt Satyagraha at Payyannur and
Menon Calicut.
Karnataka T. S. Sathyanarayana Rao Salt Satyagraha and boycott
movements in coastal areas.
Orissa Gopabandhu Choudhury Led salt satyagraha at Inchudi and
other coastal regions.
North-West Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan Khudai Khidmatgar movement
Frontier Province strongly supported civil disobedience;
severe repression.

Civil Disobedience Movement: Social Group Involvement &

Response
Group / Area Role & Impact
Urban Areas Lower support than during NCM; few lawyers left practice; some
students joined national schools.
Revolutionary Bhagat Singh and other revolutionaries attracted youth, reducing
Appeal Gandhian influence in cities.
Muslims Low participation compared to NCM; some regions experienced
communal discontent.
Merchants Calcutta Marwaris (led by G.D. Birla) supported the nationalist
cause.
Business Class Initial strong support, especially from Gujarati business
communities.
Women Actively picketed liquor shops, opium dens, and foreign cloth
stores; gained a sense of liberation.
Peasants Protested British policies in large numbers; significant rural
participation.
Tribals Participated in nonviolent protests (Satyagraha) against
government restrictions and forest laws.
Students & Youth Played a leading role in protests, strikes, boycotts, and the Salt
Satyagraha.
Movement Status Declined due to government repression; Gandhi suspended it in
(1932–34) May 1933 and withdrew it officially in April 1934.

Withdrawal of Civil Disobedience Movement

The Civil Disobedience Movement was initially withdrawn in 1931 after the Gandhi-Irwin
Pact. However, following the Second Round Table Conference‘s failure, Gandhi resumed
the movement. Arrested in January 1932, he faced severe repression, including confiscation
of Congress funds and occupation of buildings.

Civil Disobedience Movement Assessment

Despite not achieving its goals of, Purna Swaraj, the Movement occupies a special place in
the history of India’s quest for freedom. Not a failure for Congress: Congress could
mobilize great political support and got moral authority that was reflected in the massive
victory in the 1937 election.
More radical forms of Congress:
The resolution of Purna Swaraj and its attributes, declared in the Karachi Resolution, shows
the drifting of Congress towards greater radicalisation. Examples: Fundamental Rights,
Socialist Economic Policy, abolishing Zamindari, etc.
Further, a separate party, but overall supervision of Congress, called the Congress Socialist
Party, was founded in 1934. It was founded by ideologically fabian socialists Jai Prakash
Narayan, Acharya Narendra Deva and Ram Manohar Lohia.
Equal treatment to Indians: Although many Congress supporters were considerably
disappointed, especially the youth and peasants whose lands were not restored, they were
also jubilant that Indians were treated for the first time as equals in signing the pact and
holding the RTCs.

Quit India movement

INTRODUCTION
The Quit India Movement, also known to be Bharat Chado Andolan or “August Kranti
Movement held major relevance in Indian history and a turning point in the process of
Independence . The campaign was launched by the Indian National Congress under the
leadership of Mahatma Gandhi on 8th August 1942 during World War II protesting the
demand to end the suppressive British rule and to establish their own rule and demand for
freedom. The movement called for "Do or Die" as a rallying cry for complete
independence. Although the movement was accompanied by mass protests , strikes
followed by Indians,workers,students but was not only a mere protest but a fight for rights
and irreversible demand for self-rule trough unification and the sentiments of nationalism
depicting a strong desire

Historical background
The impact of World War II:
Britishers dragged the Indians into the war without taking permission or consulting with
Indian leaders that led to wider resentment among individuals. The war caused economic
hardship that led to various problems like inflation, shortage of goods that led to the
suffering of common
Failure of the Cripps Mission (1942)
The failure of Cripps mission was the most triggering point as it was being sent in India by
the British government regulated under Sir Stafford Cripps, as they had the motive to
secure the position in India during World War II a post-war dominion status to India and
the right of provinces to opt out of the Indian Union was offered by britishers to Indian but
no such effective measure was taken and thus the mission failed as under this the
Dominion Status after the war, but no immediate transfer of power The proposals did not
guarantee full independence and allowed provinces to opt out, which angered Indian
leaders.
Growing Nationalism:
The fight for India’s struggle was already an ongoing process also been followed by
various movements like Khilafat movement noncooperation movement so by 1942, The
sentiments of nationalism among people were at its peak, and people were being impatient
with British rule. They already had tasted the sweetness of self-rule through the Congress
rule in the period of 1937-39

Launch of the Quit India Movement

The working committee of the congress is Indian National Congress met on July 14,1942,
and passed the resolution to launch a mass civil disobedience movement under the
leadership of Gandhi. That was when on 8 August 1942, Gandhi addressed the masses his
followers from the Gowalia Tank Maidan in Bombay and exhorted them to participate in
the Quit India Movement and in his speech mentioned about do or die
1. Mass Uprising
• This movement was not mere of political leaders it was converted into a people’s
movement which involved a wide range consisting of Ordinary
citizens,students,workers,peasants and even women had an active role in this. This was
being in force in both rural as well as urban areas alongside that showcased the unification
under one umbrella, national unity and the rights for against the deep rooted frustration
with the britishers and their rules
2. Leaderless but Not Directionless
As the movement went through ups and downs As Gandhi and other top Congress leaders
were arrested (9 August 1942), the movement became leaderless in the formal sense but the
local leaders and activist at local and grassroot level emerged taking the charge and the
responsibly to take the movement forward. It also showcased the maturity of the masses
and their commitment to independence.
3. Non-Violent Philosophy
Gandhi's Ji always a follower of nonviolence also visible in his other movements made
appeal for "Do or Die that was a peaceful and nonviolent appeal to the britishers. The
movement compromised of the peaceful processions and strikes against the British rule
.However later on due to the absence of central leadership, many parts of the movement
turned violent later on. The Protesters started from boycotting British institution in many
places they burned police stations, cut communication lines, and disrupted railways.
 Quit India Movement: Community and Regional Participation
Group / Region Nature of Participation
Workers & Middle- Actively involved across various regions, including villages.
Class
Students (Bihar & Played a major and militant role; students from Patna and
Eastern UP) Banaras were particularly active.
Peasants / Working Participation was limited; movement focused more on
Class nationalism than specific socio-economic demands.
Tribals (Bengal & Actively participated in the struggle.
Orissa)
Government Officials Some officials, including police, secretly supported the
movement by passing on information.
Women Had a remarkable contribution; led protests, strikes, and
demonstrations; mobilized and organized communities.

British Response to Quit India Movement 1942

The response of the britishers to the Quit India Movement was brutal , rude filled with
repression and dominance by arresting the prominent congress leaders to suppress the
movement like Gandhi, Nehru and Patel. They even detained over 100,000 people, and
declared that the rule that was being followed by congress was unlawful. Violent clashes
led to even deaths ranging from 1,028 to over 10,000. The British, supported by the
Viceroy’s Council, the All-India Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, princely states, Indian
Imperial Police, and British Indian Army, used raids and force to suppress the movement.

Limitations of the Quit India Movement 1942

However this movement played a very crucial and significant role in the journey of
Independence against the British rule being full of struggle , it also had several drawbacks
that affected its overall impact . As this movement was not able to complete the objective
as they wanted a complete and immediate freedom through this movement but they were
not able to gain it as it took more years of struggle and negotiation before independence
being achieved. There was not complete consensus as some political leaders and parties
oppressed this movement like the Muslim League, Communist Party of India, and Hindu
Mahasabha were not in support of it and thus against the Movement , even the Bureaucracy
was against the movement . B. R. Ambedkar were also against the Movement.

Constitution
India, the largest democracy, stands proud with the lengthiest Constitution in this world
comprising 448 Articles in 25 Parts and 12 Schedules. The story that exists behind the formation
of the Constitution of India has a great significance in the Indian history. In 1934, the
establishment of a Constituent Assembly for making the India constitution was the brainchild of
Mr. M.N. Roy, a key figure in the Indian Communist movement.
However, the idea gained traction when the Indian National Congress advocated for it in 1935.
Though this demand was initially accepted by the British Government in 1940, the draft proposal
which was sent over with Sir Stafford Cripps did not receive a warm welcome from the Muslim
League. Finally, it was the Cabinet Mission that put forth the idea of the Constituent Assembly
marking the beginning of the formulation of the Indian Constitution, thereby creating history.
The supreme law of democratic India was drafted by the Indian Constituent Assembly. The
Assembly precisely took two years, eleven months, and eighteen days to complete the historic
duty of drafting the Indian Constitution. During this period, the Assembly held eleven sessions
spread over 165 days, among which 114 days were spent solely on consideration of the Draft
Constitution. Finally, the Constitution was adopted on 26th November 1949, with effect from
26th January 1950 being celebrated as the 'Republic Day of India'.
The idea of making a constitution for India did not emerge in one day. It took several years of
thinking and deliberation of the nation-makers. The leaders from the different parts of the
country had their own way of reforming the society against various kinds of societal conditions
that they were exposed to.
such as the idea of socialism due to the Russian revolution, the idea of liberty, equality and
fraternity' from the French revolution, the practice of parliamentary democracy persisting in
Britain, etc.
The need for making the Indian Constitution has stemmed from various historical, social, and
political factors.
Some of the reasons are set out as follows:-
o End of British colonial rule- India was under British colonial rule for nearly 200 years.
When the national independence movement started gaining momentum, the need for a
constitution became necessary to establish a new governance framework that was not dictated by
the colonial powers.
o Unity in diversity- India is a vast country with diverse cultures, religions, languages, and
traditions. A constitution was needed to provide a common legal framework that could
accommodate this vast diversity while simultaneously ensuring unity and harmony among its
people.
o Protection of fundamental rights- One of the primary objectives of the Indian Constitution
was to safeguard the fundamental rights of its citizens. These rights include the right to equality,
freedom of speech and expression, right to life and liberty, etc.
o Establishment of a democracy- India chose to be a democratic republic after gaining
independence. Thus, to establish the principles of democracy, including free and fair elections,
separation of powers, rule of law, and checks and balances among the branches of government, a
constitution
was necessary.
o Social justice and equality- It is undeniable that Indian society has always been plagued by
centuries of social discrimination based on caste, gender, and religion. The constitution was
aimed at promoting social justice and equality by outlawing discrimination, promoting
affirmative action through reservations for marginalised communities, and ensuring equal
opportunities for all citizens.
o Governance framework- The constitution provides the framework for governance by
defining the structure of the government, its powers, functions, and responsibilities. It establishes
the institutions of government, such as the legislature, executive, and judiciary, and delineates
their roles and relationships.
o Adoption of a federal system- India opted for a federal system of government where the
powers are divided between the central government and the states. The Indian Constitution
delineates this division of powers between the centre and states, as well as the mechanisms for
resolving any disputes between them.
o International recognition- A constitution was necessary for India to be recognized as a
sovereign nation in the international community and provide a legal basis for it to enter into
treaties, agreements, and diplomatic relations with other countries.
The GOI Act 1935 was the longest and most detailed Act passed during the British regime,
having 321 sections and 10 schedules. This legislation had taken its content majorly from four
sources - the reports of the Simon Commission (1930), discussions and deliberations during the
Third Round Table Conference (1932), the White Paper of 1933 and the reports of the Joint
Select Committees. Feature taken from this Act are as follows: -
1. Division of powers - This Act provided for division of powers between the centre and
units in the form of three lists - Federal list for the centre (this has taken the form of Union list
presently), Provincial list for the provinces (today, this is known as the State list and the
Concurrent list (the Concurrent list is also provided under the present constitution). In the present
constitution, the lists are given under the VIl Schedule and the power to make laws on these
subject matters is derived from Article 246.
2. Provincial autonomy - The GOI Act 1935 abolished the system of dyarchy in provinces
and, in its place, introduced
'provincial autonomy', which meant that the provinces were permitted to act as autonomous units
of administration in their defined territories. It also introduced responsible
government in the provinces, where the Governor acts on the aid and advice of ministers
responsible for the provincial legislature. Presently, Article 163 can be referred for this
purpose.
3. Bicameralism - The Act introduced bicameralism in six out of 11 provinces, which meant
there was legislative council (the upper house) as well as a legislative assembly (the lower
house) in those states. Presently, in India, 6 states, namely Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra,
Karnataka, Orissa, Telangana, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh, have bicameral legislature. The
constitutional provision providing for bicameralism is Article 168.
Country Features Borrowed
United Kingdom - Parliamentary system of government - Rule of Law - Bicameral
legislature - Single citizenship - Cabinet system and collective responsibility - Office of
Speaker
United States - Fundamental Rights - Independent judiciary - Judicial review -
Impeachment of President - Removal of judges - Post of Vice President - Written Constitution
Canada - Quasi-federal system - Distribution of powers (Union & States) - Residuary
powers with Centre
Ireland - Directive Principles of State Policy - Presidential election method - Rajya Sabha
nomination
Australia - Concurrent List - Trade & commerce freedom between states - Joint sitting of
Parliament
USSR (Russia) - Fundamental Duties - Justice ideals in the Preamble (social, economic,
political)
Germany (Weimar) - Emergency provisions
South Africa - Constitutional amendment procedure - Rajya Sabha election procedure
Japan - Procedure established by law (used in limiting Fundamental Rights)

Criticism
The Constituent Assembly was a time-consuming effort: While drawing a comparison with the
framers of the American Constitution (1789), the critics stated that the makers of the Indian
Constitution had taken a longer time period than what should have been taken.
2. The Constituent Assembly was neither a representative body nor a sovereign one: The critics
pointed out that the Assembly could not be called a representative body as the members were not
elected by means of 'Universal Adult Franchise' (UAF) and as the roots of the formation of the
Assembly lie with the British Government, the body was not a sovereign one.
3. The Constituent Assembly was dominated by members of the Congress Party: A British-
Constitutional expert recognized by the name of Granville Austin pointed out that the
Constituent Assembly of India was a one-party body, thereby charging the Assembly to be
governed only by the members of the Congress.
4. The Constituent Assembly was a Hindu-dominated body: Critics had majorly pointed out that
the Constituent Assembly represented only the Hindus of the nation, leaving behind the rest of
the religions.
Since Indian constitution has been made after taking inspiration from various foreign models,
critics argue that it’s like the sufficient adoption to India’s unique, social, cultural and political
context
According to critics many provisions of the Indian constitution resemble to government of India
act, 1935, which seems the evidence of failure to break away from colonial influences
Very lengthy in size is too bulky to detail containing some unnecessary provision. It has to be
concise to enhance transparency, efficiency and accessibility.

Working of the Constituent Assembly

On December 9, 1946, the Constituent Assembly convened for the first time at the Constitution
Hall of the Indian Parliament in New Delhi. The front row of the Hall boasted notable figures
such as Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Acharya
J.B. Kripalani, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Smt. Sarojini Naidu, Shri Hare-Krushna Mahatab, Pandit
Govind Ballabh Pant, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Shri SaratPandit Govind Ballabh Pant, Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar, Shri Sarat Chandra Bose, Shri C. Rajagopalachari and Shri M. Asaf Ali. The
auspicious occasion significantly noticed the absence of the Muslim League as they wanted a
separate nation for the Muslims. Dr. Sachchidananda Sinha, the oldest member of the
Constituent Assembly, assumed the temporary chairmanship of the meeting, which was attended
by 211 members.
Subsequently, Dr. Rajendra Prasad was elected as the President of the Constituent Assembly.
Following this, H.C. Mukherjee and V.T. Krishnamachari were elected as Vice-Presidents, thus
establishing two Vice-Presidents for the Assembly.
The working of the Constituent Assembly proceeded on the basis of the Objective Resolution
that was laid before the Assembly on 13th December 1946, by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and was
adopted by the Constituent Assembly on the date of
22 January 1947. The Objective Resolution listed eight principles that were the guiding light for
framing the constitutional structure of India with fundamental elements of independence, and
sovereignty. The foremost aspect affirmed by the said Resolution was that the government's
authority would come from the nation's people. This ensured justice (socio-economic and
political), equality before the law and various freedoms for the citizens. Moreover, to eliminate
the prolonged discrimination that prevailed in Indian society, the Resolution also provided for
adequate protection to individuals belonging to the backward classes, tribal areas, and minority
groups. Further, with an aim to uphold global peace and promote human welfare, the Objective
Resolution advocated for safeguarding the sovereignty and integrity of the nation at all costs
. The Indian Independence Act, 1947, introduced some important changes in the working of
the Constituent Assembly and they are worth mentioning here for the purposes of our
discussion:-
1. The Assembly became a fully functioning sovereign body, and by means of the Act of
1947, any law made under the umbrella of the British Parliament with regards to India could be
scrapped, altered, or modified.
2. The Assembly was majorly vested with two functions;
1. Make a Constitution for the free nation; and
2. Enacting laws for the country and its people to be governed by.
3. The total strength of assembly is fixed 299(229 Indian provinces 70 princely state)
Adoption of the national flag, national song, and national anthem on 22nd July 1947, and 24th
January 1950 respectively.
2. In May 1949, the Assembly had ratified India's membership of the Commonwealth.
3. The Assembly on 24th January 1950, elected Dr. Rajendra Prasad as its first President.

Finally, it was on 29 August 1947, a Drafting Committee under the chairmanship of Dr. B.R.
Ambedkar was formulated by the Constituent Assembly to prepare a Draft Constitution for India.
Repeated debates, discussions, arguments, scrapping of clauses, and addition of clauses took
place whenever the Committee used to meet and all were worth it when the Constitution of India
was adopted by the country on 26 November 1949 with 284 members signing the same. After
that, the Assembly ceased to exist from the 26th day of January, 1950 when the Constitution
began to be applicable and a new Parliament was formed in 1952.

Committees of the Constituent Assembly

To avoid any kind of mismanagement and take into account the load of work to be dusted off,
the Constituent Assembly formulated different committees working in specific areas of
constitution-making.
Major committees
There were eight major committees, namely;
1. The Union Powers Committee - presided over by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. This committee
was given the responsibility to define the subjects over which the Union executive and
legislature has power.
2. The Union Constitution Committee - presided over by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. It was made
to write the Constitution of India.
3. The Provincial Constitution Committee presided over by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. This
committee was set up to discuss and provide for a model Provincial Constitution, which would
determine the system and form of government at the provincial level.
4 Drafting Committee - presided over by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
It was entrusted with the responsibility of drafting a new constitution for India based on the
reports submitted by the other committees of the constituent assembly.
5 Advisory Committee on Fundamental Rights,
Minorities and Tribal and Excluded Areas - presided over by Sardar Vallabhhai Patel. This
Committee had the following five sub-committees:
— Fundamental Rights Sub-Committee with J.B. Kripalani as the Chairman.
Minorities Sub-Committee with H.C. Mukherjee as the Chairman.North-East Frontier Tribal
Areas and Assam Excluded
& Partially Excluded Areas Sub-Committee with Gopinath Bardoloi as the Chairman.
— Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas (Other than those in Assam) Sub-Committee with
A.V. Thakkar as the Chairman.North-West Frontier Tribal Areas Sub-Committee.
6 Rules of Procedure Committee - presided over by Dr.
Rajendra Prasad. The committee was responsible for framing all the rules of the Constituent
Assembly, including those for admission and resignation of members, conduct of business in the
Assembly and its various committees, and fixing salaries and allowances of all persons involved
in the Assembly's functioning.
7 States Committee (Committee for Negotiating with States) - presided over by Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru.
8 The Steering Committee - presided over by Dr. Rajendra
Prasad.
There were 13 minority committees
Drafting committee
special mention of the Drafting Committee headed by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar is required. Set up on
29th August 1947, the Drafting Committee was vested with the main task of drafting the
Constitution of India after taking into account proposals from different committees. This
Committee comprised seven members of the Assembly namely;
1. Dr. B. R Ambedkar as the Chairman of the Committee;
2. Dr. K M Munshi
3. Syed Mohammad Saadullah
4. N Madhava Rau (Note: He replaced B.L. Mitter, who had resigned due to ill health)
5. N Gopalaswamy Ayyangar
6. Alladi Krishnaswamy Ayyar
7. T T Krishnamachari (Note: He replaced D.P. Khaitan, who died in 1948)
The Committee took a period of not beyond six months to prepare its first draft (published in
February 1948), which was subjected to changes by suggestions, public comments, and various
criticisms, and thereafter the second draft was released in October 1948.

There were 15 women who made valuable contribution to the formation of India’s Constitution,
such as Smt Ammu Swaminathan Shrimati g. Durgabai smt Hansa Mehta , Sarojini Naidu

Debates and discussion

Union of states a unique question that arise among the maker was whether the future state of
India should be described as a union or a federation. The final view was in favour of the word
union. Dr Ambedkar clarified that the Indian union is not result of any of the agreement among
the state.
Power to establish new state
Fundamental rights While the Cabinet Mission of plan of 1946, provided setting up of an
advisory committee for reporting on fundamental rights with respect to article 14 BN Rao
pointed out the first part of article 14, mentioning equality before the law and equal protection of
the law
Then talk about article 15 that legal provision might occasionally be made for women to prohibit
their employment for specific period before the childbirth and article 17 for untouchability and
then shouts of the Mahatma Gandhi ki Jai in the assembly
Article 19 does not expressly contain the freedom to press but initially drafted by Munshi and
Ambedkar and Thakurdas suggested the insert of the word reasonable before the word restriction
in order to put the soul in an otherwise lifeless article
Dpsp Finally, the principal were incorporated with considerable support. This principle had no
legal force behind that he was not prepared to admit that had no support of binding force. They
simply useless because of them we nonjusticiable in nature.
The Constitution was adopted on November 26, 1949, containing a Preamble, 395 Articles, and 8
Schedules after three sets of readings of the Draft that was prepared by the Drafting Committee,
and published in October 1948. The motion on Draft Constitution was declared to be passed on
November 26, 1949, thereby receiving the signatures of the members along with the President.
This day is famously known as the 'Law Day' or the 'Constitution Day'. It is to be noted that the
Preamble succeeded the Constitution in enactment. Among the 395 Articles, some of the Articles
like Articles 5 to 9, Articles 379, 392, and 393, came into force on 26th November, 1949 itself.
The rest of the Articles were enforced on Republic Day, which is 26th January 1950. As the
Constitution of India commenced, the Indian Independence Act, 1947, and the Government of
India Act, 1935, ceased to exist. At present, our Constitution is decorated with 448 Articles, 25
Parts, and 12 Schedules.
Key features
Modern constitution-It was drafted in mid-20th century. This is one of the reason various feature
of our Constitution has been incorporated inspiration from different constitution and modifying
them to suit the condition of Indian society.
Lengthiest written constitution- India is the seventh largest country in the world. It consist of
diverse social religious backgrounds. The makers felt it necessary to include detailed provisions
on fundamental rights and safeguards for minorities and other backward classes and it has a
detailed norms with respect to centre state relation.-
Blend of rigid and flexibility - Indian Constitution also provides for amending power to the
Parliament under article 368
Preamble-It has been added under the Constitution of the Kesavananda Bharati versus State of
Kerala and declare the basic type of government and polity, sovereign socialist through 42
amendments act , secular, democratic republic established in the country
Welfare state To strengthen this concept, the makers In DPSP which lay down the economic
social political goals of Indian constitutional system, maximise the social welfare and basic
values such as employment, health, education
Secular state
Fundamental rights
Fundamental duties
Integrated and independent judiciary
Single citizenship
Nationalist movement

I. Introduction
• Constitutional ideas in India existed in nascent forms historically.
• The Indian National Congress (INC) evolved from a ‘Debating Club’ to a Mass
Movement.
• By 1889, it was demanding more Indian representation in legislative bodies.

II. Early Constitutional Initiatives

1. Constitution of India Bill, 1895

• Contained 111 provisions.
• Influenced by US and Brazilian Constitutions.
• Chapters on Legislature, Executive, Judiciary.
• Included civil and political rights, unlike British constitutionalism.
• Aimed to catalogue legislative subjects.

2. Declaration of Rights, 1918 (Bombay)

• Sought statutory recognition by the British Parliament for Indian rights equal to
British citizens.

3. Commonwealth of India Bill, 1925

• Drafted by Annie Besant and Tej Bahadur Sapru.
• Introduced in British Parliament but failed.
• Called for:
• Local self-government
• Five-tier governance (village to central)
• Civil and political rights: liberty, property, conscience, expression
• Social rights: free elementary education

III. Nehru Report, 1928

• Initiated after Madras Congress Session (1927).
• Motilal Nehru headed the committee.
• Aimed for Dominion Status within the British Empire.
• Influences:
• Fundamental Rights (Part III)
• Directive Principles (Part IV)
• Detailed governance framework: legislature, executive, judiciary
• Addressed communal representation

IV. Other Constitutional Drafts and Reports

• M.N. Roy (1946) – Constitution of India: A Draft
• S.N. Agarwal (1946) – Gandhian Constitution for Free India
• Socialist Party (1948) – Draft Constitution of the Indian Republic
 • Sapru Committee Report (1945) – Focused on communal harmony and minority
rights
V. Constitution-Making Since 1945
1. Political Developments
• After WWII, British intent to grant India independence strengthened.
• Jinnah demanded two Assemblies (Two-nation theory).
• Cabinet Mission Plan (May 1946): accepted with reservations by both Congress and
Muslim League.
• Constituent Assembly Elections (July 1946):
• Congress: 208 seats
• Muslim League: 73
• Princely States: 93

2. Sessions of the Constituent Assembly

• 1st Session (9 Dec 1946) – Largely unproductive
• 13 Dec 1946 – Nehru’s ‘Objectives Resolution’ presented
• Subsequent sessions overshadowed by growing divide and Partition plans
• Indian Independence Act, 1947: Came into force on 15 Aug 1947; Assembly became
Dominion Parliament
VI. Structure and Work of the Constituent Assembly
• Duration: 2 years, 11 months, 18 days (9 Dec 1946 – 26 Nov 1949)
• Key Committees: Rules, Steering, Drafting, Advisory, etc.
• Notable Members: B.N. Rau, Nehru, Patel, Ambedkar (Drafting Committee Chair),
Azad, Rajendra Prasad, Hansa Mehta, Ayyar, Mukherjee, and others

Phases of Constitution-Making:
1. Dec 1946 – Aug 1947: Subject-specific Working Committees
2. Aug – Oct 1947: B.N. Rau’s first draft
3. Oct 1947 – Feb 1948: Drafting Committee’s revised draft
4. Feb – Nov 1948: Public feedback invited
5. Nov 1948 – Nov 1949:
• Clause-by-clause debate
• Amendments accepted and final draft prepared
• Adopted on 26 November 1949

I. Early Attempts at Constitution-Making (1885–1928)

A. Indian National Congress Resolutions (1889)
• Within five years of its founding, the Congress passed resolutions in Bombay demanding
increased Indian representation in legislative councils under the Indian Councils Act.
B. The 1895 Constitution of India Bill
• Authorship unknown; inspired by U.S. and Brazilian constitutions.
• Contained:
o Separate chapters on legislature, executive, judiciary
o Fundamental rights
 o Early attempt at listing legislative subjects (a precursor to the Union, State, and
Concurrent Lists in the final Constitution)
• Noteworthy for its radical rights-based approach, which contrasted with traditional
British constitutionalism that lacked a codified Bill of Rights.

II. Evolving Constitutional Blueprints (1918–1928)

A. Declaration of Rights (1918)
• Congress sought equal rights for Indians, demanding a British parliamentary statute to
that effect.
B. Commonwealth of India Bill (1925)
• Drafted by a convention led by Annie Besant and lawyer Tej Bahadur Sapru.
• Introduced in the British House of Commons.
• Proposed a multi-tiered governance structure (village, taluk, district, province, center).
• Expanded rights framework—free speech, elementary education, property, conscience,
etc.
• Though unsuccessful legislatively, it influenced future drafts, including the Nehru
Report.
C. Motilal Nehru Report (1928)
• Response to continued colonial delay in granting self-governance.
• Demanded Dominion Status (like Canada or Australia).
• Proposed:
o Parliamentary system
o Responsible government
o Comprehensive fundamental rights
o Structure of three government branches
o Addressed communal representation
• Called “exceptional” for inspiring Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive
Principles) of the final Constitution.

III. Alternative Conceptions (1930s–1945)

A. Drafts by Civil Society and Political Groups:
1. MN Roy (1946) – A radical, populist draft focused on rights and decentralization.
2. S.N. Agarwala (1946) – Proposed a Gandhian constitution based on village autonomy.
3. Socialist Party (1948) – Omitted right to property, emphasizing collective welfare.
B. Sapru Committee Report (1945)
• Tej Bahadur Sapru-led committee emphasized:
o Minority rights
o Religious protections
o Influenced communal rights provisions in the final Constitution.

IV. Formation of the Constituent Assembly (1946–1950)

A. Establishment and Composition
• Created following the Cabinet Mission Plan (1946).
• Total: 389 members, including 93 from princely states.
• Elected indirectly through provincial legislatures (not universal adult suffrage).
• Congress and Muslim League were dominant parties.
• League later boycotted the Assembly after July 1947.
B. Initial Sessions and Partition Context
• First session: 9 December 1946
• By 15 August 1947, with the enactment of the Indian Independence Act, the Assembly
became the Dominion Parliament.
• Early sessions disrupted by:
o Partition violence
o Muslim League’s boycott
o Princely state negotiations
• Despite turmoil, the Assembly began forming working committees.

V. The Context of Constitution-Making

A. Social and Political Turmoil
• Communal riots (starting August 1946)
• Partition violence (1947) – 1–2 million deaths
• Refugee crisis – cities like Delhi and Calcutta overwhelmed
• Economic crisis due to British exploitation and World War II
• Armed Communist revolts (Telangana, 1948)
• Gandhi’s assassination (1948) – repression of Hindu right-wing (RSS)
B. Impact on Constitution Design
• Resulted in strong preference for:
o Centralized authority
o Powerful executive
o Ability to impose restrictions on civil liberties during crises
o Recognition of internal threats (communalism, secessionism, extremism)

VI. Stages of Constitution Drafting

1. Working Committees formed to examine different issues (Dec 1946 – Aug 1947)
2. First draft prepared by B.N. Rau (Aug – Oct 1947)
3. Drafting Committee under Dr. B.R. Ambedkar revised it (Oct 1947 – Feb 1948)
4. Public feedback was invited and incorporated (Feb – Nov 1948)
5. Clause-by-clause debate in the Assembly (Nov 1948 – Oct 1949)
6. Final adoption: 26 November 1949
7. Came into force: 26 January 1950

VII. Key Features and Themes in the Constitution

A. Structural Framework
• Parliamentary democracy with a ceremonial President and executive Prime Minister
• Federal structure with a strong center
• Elected state legislatures, but governors nominated by the center
B. Innovations
• Bill of Rights (Part III) – civil and political rights
• Directive Principles (Part IV) – socio-economic goals
• Independent institutions – judiciary, Election Commission, CAG
• Amending procedure – more flexible than U.S. (over 100 amendments so far)
C. Doctrine of Basic Structure
• Developed by the judiciary post-1973 to prevent Parliament from amending the “core”
features of the Constitution

VIII. Philosophical Tensions and Legacies

A. Influences
• Foreign models used extensively (e.g., U.S. rights, British parliamentary system,
Canadian federalism)
• Sparked debates on indigenous vs. foreign models
B. Constitution as Contradictory Yet Durable
• Enabled coexistence of:
o Democracy and centralization
o Rights and restrictions
o Development goals and civil liberties
• Reflects tensions between unity, development, and freedom
C. Goals of the Framers (as per scholars):
• Upendra Baxi: Emphasized justice, development, and governance.
• Uday Mehta: Framers focused on national unity, social transformation, and international
stature.

Timeline: Constitutional Development in India

1928 – Motilal Nehru Report
• First formal demand for Fundamental Rights in India.
1935 – Government of India Act, 1935
• Included provisions resembling social welfare directives, which influenced DPSPs.
1937 – Irish Constitution
• Inspired the structure and concept of Directive Principles in India.
1946–1949 – Constituent Assembly Debates
• Drafting of the Constitution, including:
o Part III: Fundamental Rights (justiciable)
o Part IV: Directive Principles (non-justiciable)
o Framework for an independent Judiciary
1950 – Constitution of India Enforced (January 26)
• Enacted:
o Part III – Fundamental Rights (Articles 12–35)
o Part IV – Directive Principles of State Policy (Articles 36–51)
o Part V & VI – Establishment of Supreme Court and High Courts
1973 – Kesavananda Bharati Case
• Supreme Court formulates Basic Structure Doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to
amend the Constitution.
1976 – 42nd Constitutional Amendment
• Tried to reduce Judiciary's power, elevated DPSPs over Fundamental Rights in some
contexts.
• Added "Socialist" and "Secular" to the Preamble.
1978 – 44th Constitutional Amendment
• Reversed several Emergency-era changes.
• Restored the primacy of Fundamental Rights.
1980 – Minerva Mills Case
• Reasserted balance between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs.
• Reinforced the Basic Structure Doctrine.