14 October 2010

Pin It

Part 32 – Indian Legal History - British Rule in India and development law and administration –

Part 32 – Indian Legal History - British Rule in India and development law and administration –

To develop Indian laws British people took more than 200 Years.
This trial and error journey started in year 1661.
Only after doing trial and error British people were successful in giving India a good justice system and administration with loopholes to save the king and administrative officials who work for the king of England and now today’s our politicians.

1774 – First time Supreme Court was established by Regulating Act. This brought British barristers and lawyers into India.

1781 – The act directed Supreme Court of India to apply personal laws of Hindus to Hindus and Muslim laws to Muslims in certain cases.

Never Forget the truth that when someone wins the nation, that nation has to follow the rules and laws of New King.
Before British Empire India used to follow the rules and laws of Muslim Kings and then Sikh Kings and Maratha Kings and other kings.

Prior to Formation and birth of India by British Crown in a reality there was no India , no kingdom was their named or called as India .

British came, saw, won all the states and formed the India and before leaving India formed Pakistan.

The English people who traveled outside England and found new territories, settled on that land carried their own laws with them that is English law.
This English law was called as Common law.
Once the state was won by the British People the English law became the common law of the new country.
Also British law stated that whatever place British citizen may go he must follow British rules and he will be always under British Crown or parliament.

Australia, U.S.A and Canada also follow in this category,they were ruled and governed by the British people and crown but when these countries got independence the intelligent people of these nations removed the bad things from the law and made such provisions that their own civil servant or politicians will not enjoy protection from corruption thus became super powers in few years.

Regarding British Crown, British Citizens and British Parliament they got their own laws and powers from that time which kept changing here I am not mentioning about those powers of king on colony and powers of British Parliament on British Colonies.

But in India we never removed the bad civil, criminal procedure and laws from these British laws after our Independence and we kept those bad laws and result is that uneducated, criminal people are ruling us Indians

today now position is that we Indians will never be able to change this without peaceful civil war as all political parties have already united but Indians do not understand and realize that they are still fighting on name of religion and caste.

When British came to India, Indians followed laws which came from Religion and religion can not act as law but we followed Religion as a law.

Following religion as a law in a human society is a one step, and in democracy religion has nothing to do, human rights are more important that religion.

British people never introduced complete English law in India.
Indian laws were developed here in India by trial and error by British People which was based on the British law.

British People always tried to follow Hindu laws for Hindu and Muslim laws for Muslims.

English law of will, English law property, English law of marriage these are few examples which were never fully applied.

Act of Settlement 1781 –
Section 17 of act said , directed that questions of inheritance and succession and all matters of contract and dealing between party and party should be determined in case of Hindu as per Hindu law and in case of Muslim as per Muslim law.

After this very interesting question one will ask, what if two parties belong to different religion one is Hindu and other is Muslim or English.

Section 17 of the act of 1781 said that, when parties to a suit belonged to different persuasions, then the law of the defendant was to apply.

What does law of the defendant mean?
In general terms one will say that law of defendant means that if plaintiff is Hindu and defendant is Muslim then use Muslim law and if defendant is Hindu use Hindu law or if defendant is English use English law.

This was confusing law and courts decided as per case and follow English law also and Hindu as well as Muslim law as per the case.

Regarding contracts Supreme Court normally used the English contract laws.

In Presidency of Bombay and Calcutta law of Damdupat was applied to Hindus.
Damdupat under this a Hindu could not claim as interest more than the amount of the principal lent.
The court held as not a moral but it is a rule of law.

Continued –

Reality Views by sm

More Reading –

Below is the link for Part One –


Below are the links for Part 1 to last Part 38
Complete Indian Legal History from year 1600 to 1935



kiran sawhney October 14, 2010  

Lots of things about laws. Interesting.

sm,  October 14, 2010  

Kiran Bajaj Sawhney,,

Tara,  October 14, 2010  


Sathish Chandrasekaran (சதீஷ் சந்திரசேகரன்) October 14, 2010  

Its really painful to see that Indian Laws lack the tooth :(

Its even more painful to see that when some good laws are passed they are not implemented properly :(

sm,  October 14, 2010  


SG October 15, 2010  

Sorry to say Indians are still following the laws established for India by the British.

sm,  October 15, 2010  


chitra October 15, 2010  

We are independent. But still live in the British era.

sm,  October 15, 2010  


Renu December 29, 2010  

Laws alone cant do a thing, we have to change the complete mind set here.

sm,  December 29, 2010  

we need to change rules not mind set, today babus and politicians do not have fear of law.
thus no one fears the law