INTRODUCTION

• The development of criminal law in India is a historical process of transitioning from Mohammedan Law of Crimes during Mughal rule to the codified Indian Penal Code, 1860, under British rule.
• Mohammedan criminal law categorized crimes into religious and secular offences, focusing on punishment rather than reform.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / EVOLUTION

1. Mughal Rule

1. • Criminal justice was governed by Mohammedan Law, which included strict and often severe punishments.
   • This system, although detailed, was suited to a different socio-political and cultural environment.

2. British Administration

1. • When the British gained administrative control over Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, they retained Mohammedan Law.
   • However, the British found it inadequate, archaic, and inconsistent with their own principles of natural justice and orderly governance.

3. Transition to Codified Law

1. • British officials introduced reforms gradually, ensuring compatibility with Western jurisprudence.
   • The culmination of this process was the enactment of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which replaced Mohammedan Law entirely.

MOHAMMEDAN LAW OF CRIMES

1. Categories of Punishment

1. • Hadd: Prescribed fixed punishments for serious offences like theft or adultery.
   • Tazir: Discretionary punishments left to the judge’s decision, often inconsistent.
   • Kisa: Retaliation or “an eye for an eye” for crimes like murder or serious injuries.
   • Diya: Blood money or compensation as an alternative to Kisa.

2. Salient Features

1. • Crimes were divided into offences against God (e.g., adultery, drunkenness) and offences against man (e.g., murder, robbery).
   • Crimes against God were considered graver, warranting stricter punishments.
   • Evidentiary requirements were stringent, often resulting in acquittals due to lack of sufficient witnesses.

3. Challenges and Criticism

1. • The system lacked uniformity and fairness, with excessive reliance on witnesses and private claims for justice.
   • Severe punishments like amputation and stoning were often barbaric and inhumane.
   • The concept of private justice allowed offenders to escape punishment through monetary compensation (Diya).

DEFECTS IN MOHAMMEDAN LAW OF CRIMES

1. Primitive Nature

1. • The law focused on private redress rather than protecting society as a whole.
   • Murder and other serious crimes were treated as private grievances, leaving punishment at the discretion of the victim’s family.

2. Illogical Distinctions

1. • Differentiation in punishment for homicide based on the instrument of killing rather than intent.
   • For example, using a weapon with iron resulted in capital punishment, while strangulation did not.

3. Discrimination in Evidence

1. • Testimony of a non-Muslim was not admissible against a Muslim.
   • Women’s testimony carried half the weight of men’s testimony.

4. Excessive Technicalities

1. • Hadd offences required rigorous proof, such as four male witnesses for adultery.
   • Circumstantial evidence was often disregarded.

5. Inconsistency and Caprice

1. • Discretionary punishments under Tazir were arbitrary and dependent on the judge’s whims.

REFORMS BY THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

1. Cornwallis’ Reforms (1790–1793)

1. • Doctrine of Intent: Abolished reliance on the mode of killing and emphasized the criminal’s intent.
   • Heir’s Discretion Removed: Prohibited victims’ families from pardoning murderers, ensuring public justice.
   • Abolition of Mutilation: Replaced barbaric punishments like amputation with imprisonment or hard labor.

2. Regulation XIV of 1797

1. • Addressed issues of unpaid blood money (Diya) leading to lifelong imprisonment.
   • Introduced fixed terms of imprisonment for those unable to pay fines.

3. Regulation VI of 1832

1. • Marked the end of Mohammedan Law as the general law.
   • Allowed non-Muslims to opt out of trials under Mohammedan Law.
   • Introduced the jury system, making trials impartial and secular.

4. Regulation LIII of 1803

1. • Standardized discretionary punishments under Tazir.
   • Limited maximum punishment to 39 stripes or seven years of imprisonment for undefined offences.

CASE LAWS / PRECEDENTS

1. Case on Murder and Heir’s Pardon

1. • A man murdered his brother, and another brother pardoned the offender to benefit from inheritance.
   • Exposed the flaws of allowing heirs to pardon offenders, leading to reform by Regulation of 1790.

2. Case on Discrimination in Evidence

1. • Several cases highlighted the inequality of non-Muslim testimony against Muslims, prompting reforms under Cornwallis in 1792.

3. Case on Intent in Homicide

1. • A man killed a child by drowning but escaped capital punishment as no weapon was used.
   • This led to the doctrine of intent reform in the Regulation of 1790.

IMPACT OF THE REFORMS

1. Abolition of Primitive Practices

1. • Stoning, amputation, and excessive corporal punishments were replaced with imprisonment.

2. Uniformity in Law

1. • Introduced consistency in discretionary punishments, reducing judicial arbitrariness.

3. Secularization of Justice

1. • Allowed non-Muslims to seek exemption from Mohammedan Law.
   • The jury system provided a fair trial mechanism.

4. Public Justice Focus

1. • Transformed crimes from private grievances into public offences, emphasizing societal welfare.

LEGACY AND ENACTMENT OF INDIAN PENAL CODE (1860)

1. Codification

1. • The reforms paved the way for the Indian Penal Code, codifying criminal law in India on secular and rational principles.

2. Key Features of IPC

1. • Defined offences clearly, ensuring uniformity and fairness.
   • Incorporated principles of deterrence and reformative justice.

3. Significance

1. • Marked a departure from religious laws towards a universal legal system.
   • Laid the foundation for a modern criminal justice system in India.