CHARTER OF 1668 AND ESTABLISHMENT OF GOVERNANCE

• In 1534, the Portuguese acquired Bombay from the King of Gujarat.
• Bombay was transferred to English King Charles II in 1661 by the Portuguese as part of a royal dowry. Charles II leased it to the East India Company in 1668, thus placing the territory under Company control for an annual fee of £10.

Provisions of the 1668 Charter:

• The 1668 Charter empowered the East India Company with legislative authority in Bombay, allowing it to create laws, ordinances, and regulations for governance.
• However, laws needed to align closely with English laws and could not contradict them.
• The Company could establish courts and penalize offenders, including the authority to impose fines, imprisonment, and capital punishment.

FIRST JUDICIAL SYSTEM (1670) – FOUNDATION OF JUSTICE

Role of Gerald Aungier:

• Gerald Aungier, then Governor of the Surat Factory, laid the foundation for Bombay’s judicial system in 1670, becoming known as the “true founder of Bombay.”

Structure and Jurisdiction:

• Bombay was divided into two divisions: Bombay-Mazagaon-Girgaon and Mahim-Parel-Sion-Worli.
• Each division had a local court comprising four to five judges, with jurisdiction over civil matters up to 200 Xeraphins (approximately 150 rupees) and minor criminal cases.
• The Customs Officer, typically an Englishman, presided over these courts, supported by a panel that included Indian judges. This inclusion helped integrate the English administration with the local populace.

Higher Court:

• The Deputy Governor and Council served as a superior court with both original and appellate jurisdiction, hearing appeals from lower courts and trying serious civil and criminal cases.
• Trials in the superior court involved jury proceedings, though judges lacked formal legal training, and executive and judicial powers remained closely connected, undermining independence.

SCHEME OF 1672 – TRANSITION TO ENGLISH LAW

• Portuguese laws dominated Bombay until 1672, when English law was officially introduced via a governmental proclamation on August 1, 1672.

Structure of the Court System (1672):

• A central court was established in Bombay with broad jurisdiction over civil, criminal, and testamentary matters. It sat weekly for civil cases, which were heard with a jury.
• Criminal cases involved preliminary examination by English Justices of the Peace in each division, who would forward case records to the central court for trial.
• To prevent judicial corruption, the government banned the judge from private trading, offering a salary instead, primarily funded through court fees.

Court of Conscience:

• A supplementary court for minor civil cases below 20 Xeraphins, known as the Court of Conscience, provided accessible justice for the poor without fees. Trials here were summary and jury-free.

End of the Judicial System (1672):

• The judicial structure continued until 1683, when Keigwin’s Rebellion interrupted legal functions. Following the rebellion, control was restored to the Company in 1684, marking the end of the initial judicial phase.

SECOND PHASE – COURT OF ADMIRALTY (1684)

Charter of 1683 and Admiralty Court:

• A Royal Charter in 1683 established an Admiralty Court in Bombay, mirroring the Madras Court (established 1686). Dr. John St. John, a legal professional from England, was appointed as judge.

Expanded Jurisdiction and Conflicts:

• The Admiralty Court initially had wide jurisdiction over civil, criminal, and maritime cases due to the disruption of previous courts.
• Tensions arose between Dr. John and Mr. Child, the President of the Surat Factory. Child restricted Dr. John’s jurisdiction to maritime cases, eventually leading to Dr. John’s dismissal in 1687.

Significance of the Admiralty Court:

• The Court of Admiralty marked the first attempt to introduce trained legal professionals into the Indian judicial system, though it also reflected the Company’s skepticism toward legal professionals, fearing litigation complications.

THIRD PHASE – COURT OF JUDICATURE (1718)

Formation of the 1718 Court:

• After a 30-year gap in judicial development, a new Court of Judicature was established on March 25, 1718, comprising a Chief Justice and nine other judges, including four Indian representatives from Hindu, Muslim, Portuguese Christian, and Parsi communities.
• This court had extensive civil, criminal, probate, and administrative jurisdiction, with a focus on respecting caste customs, Company directives, and English laws.

Appellate Structure and Costs:

• Appeals went to the Governor and Council of Bombay. The appellate process involved nominal fees to ensure justice was accessible.
• The court introduced modest charges, making litigation affordable, with a fee structure promoting efficient proceedings.

Role of Indian Judges:

• Indian judges served primarily as assessors, providing insights on local customs, though they lacked equal status to English judges. This followed the precedent of the 1687 Madras Mayor’s Court.

Judicial Operations and Sentencing:

• The court prioritized efficiency and affordability, often delivering quick, commonsense judgments with minimal procedural formalities.
• Harsh penalties like public whipping and indefinite imprisonment were common, with lesser reliance on jury trials and rigorous standards of proof, unlike modern norms.

COMPARISON OF THE 1672 AND 1718 COURTS

MAYOR’S COURT OF 1726 – REFORM AND MODERNIZATION

The Court of Judicature of 1718 was eventually replaced in 1728 by the Mayor’s Court, established under the Royal Charter of 1726, reflecting the ongoing evolution of the legal system and moving closer to the structured, English judicial model.