History of Indian Judicial System

Indian judicial system is one of the oldest judicial system in the world. In fact, no other judicial system has a more ancient or exalted pedigree. The principles and systems enunciated by Kautilya were very similar to ancient tradition that was already established in the age of the Ramayana. Rama, the King of Ayodhya, was compelled to banish his wife/queen, whom he loved and in whose chastity he had not any doubt, simply because his subjects disapproved by the society because she had spent a year in the house of her abductor. The king had given importance to the will of the people, despite the fact that it broke his heart and his own family. The law was then a part of religion, which everyone was supposed to follow meticulously. There were sanctions for the non-observance of these laws.

However, the judicial systems, those were practiced during the ancient India, gradually disrupted because of different foreign invasion. By the time of medieval India, there were Mughal rule and judicial system was much different. Thirdly, after the advent of the British East India Company, the laws and courts that were in existence in different parts of India were not much systematic and had no consistency whatsoever because they mainly depended on the whims and fancies of the rulers, who had their own notions of justice that radically differed from one another.

Under the circumstances, it is difficult to establish any direct link between the diverse judicial systems prevailing before 1600 A.D. and the present one. These indigenous legal systems fell into oblivion with the strengthening of British rule in India in the 17th century. It is mainly for this reason that the indigenous legal systems that prevailed in India prior to the introduction of British rule are generally excluded from the scope of study of Indian legal history or the Indian judicial system.

First Phase

From the point of view of chronology, the beginning of the Indian Judicial System can be traced back to the Anglo-India era, when the judicial system was at its primitive stage. The British settlers established their first settlement at Surat, which was an important trading centre at that time. Subsequently, similar settlements started in Bombay and Madras. The British company was entrusted with the responsibility of governing these three petty settlements in India. For the administration of these settlements, they improvised an elementary judicial system whereby they settled their mutual disputes among themselves.

The notable feature of this system was that the administration of law and justice was entrusted to non-legal and non-professional Englishmen who belonged to the trading community and had little knowledge of the law and its procedures. As a matter of fact, they were expected to follow the provisions of English law in discharging their judicial functions, but in practise they decided cases according to their common sense and their notions of justice. The judiciary in the Presidency Towns was completely dependent on and subordinated to the Executive, which was the supreme administrative authority in British-occupied territories in India.

Second Phase

The second phase of the history of the Indian Judicial System commences with the establishment of the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William (Calcutta) under the Regulating Act, 1773, enacted by the British Parliament, which is considered a landmark in the development of legal institutions in India. It was an English Law Court that consisted of professional English judges who were well versed in law and legal practice. There was also an English Bar to assist the Court in the administration of justice. This court was modelled on the pattern of the Court of Westminster in England. The Supreme Court was completely independent of the legislature and the executive. It even exercised some control over the executive, introducing the concept of judicial control over administrative actions in India.

The net result was that the powers of the executive government were drastically curtailed, which eventually led to hostility and frequent clashes between the Supreme Court and the Supreme Council. It was only after the Settlement Act of 1781 that the differences between these two premier institutions of the Company’s government in India were resolved by making the Council independent of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

Third Phase

The third phase in the evolution of the Indian Judicial System or Anglo-Indian legal history begins when the company itself takes up the administration of justice in Bengal by introducing the "Adalat System" in the mofussils. In the initial stages, the Adaltas were manned by the British executive civil servants of the company, who had no legal training. They, being primarily the executive officers of the company’s government, considered judicial work as one of their secondary functions of lesser importance. However, in civil matters, the judicial functions were separated from the executive, while criminal justice was still administered by an executive official known as the Collector. 

Fourth Phase

The next phase of the legal history of India is marked by the unification of the dual system of courts prevailing in the Presidency towns and mofussil areas into a single one with the establishment of high courts under the High Courts Act of 1861. The establishment of the High Court by abolishing the Supreme Court and the Sadar Adalats of Presidency Towns was an attempt to simplify the judicial system.

Fifth Phase

The emergence of the "Private Council" as the highest court of appeal in India constitutes yet another important phase of development in the Indian Judicial System. It stimulated the proper development of laws in India on a uniform pattern and also motivated the courts to apply high judicial standards in discharging their functions as dispensers of justice. The growth of laws became more conspicuous after 1833 with the setting up of the First Law Commission, which started the process of codifying Indian laws to ensure uniformity and certainty in the administration of justice.

Sixth Phase

The Government of India Act of 1935 set up the Federal Court of India to act as an intermediate appellant court between high courts and the "Privy Council" in regard to matters involving the interpretation of the Indian Constitution. It was not to "pronounce any judgement other than a declaratory judgment," which meant that it could declare what the law was but did not have authority to ensure exact compliance with its decisions. The Federal Court’s power of "judicial review" was largely a paper exercise, making it a body with very limited power.

Post-Independence Era

Despite the restrictions placed on it, the Federal Court continued to function until January 26, 1950, when independent India’s Constitution came into force. In the meantime, the Constituent Assembly became busy drafting the basic framework of the legal system and judiciary. The members of the Constituent Assembly envisaged the judiciary as the guardian of rights and justice. They wanted to keep the judiciary independent and insulated from the coercion and pressures of other organs.

The "Sapru Committee Report" on judiciary and the Constituent Assembly’s Adhoc Committee on the Supreme Court Report formed the bulk of the guidelines for judiciary. With India's independence in 1947, the judicial system had to be modified to suit the changed conditions. The jurisdiction of the Privy Council over Indian appeals came to an end with the establishment of the Supreme Court of India on January 26, 1950.

Conclusion

Indian society as it stood: the king himself was subject to the law; arbitrary power was unknown to Indian political theory and jurisprudence; the king's right to govern was subject to the fulfilment of duties; the judges were independent and subject only to the law; ancient India had the highest standard of any ancient nation in regards to ability, learning, integrity, impartiality, and an impartial mind.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. What is Indian judicial system?

Ans. India has a single integrated judicial system. The judiciary in India has a pyramidal structure with the Supreme Court (SC) at the top.

Q2. What is the meaning of judicial system?

Ans. The system of law courts that administer justice and constitute the judicial branch of government.

Q3. What were the 2 main types of justice systems?

Ans. Two types of legal traditions dominate the nature of investigation and adjudication around the world: adversarial and inquisitorial legal systems. 

Q4. When was Indian judicial system formed?

Ans. Supreme Court is the Apex court of the country and was constituted on 28th January 1950. It is the highest court of appeal and enjoys both original suits and appeals of High Court judgments.