Law & Order Administration - UPSC PDF Download

lntroduction

In the previous units, we've observed how the British progressively took control over the entire Indian subcontinent through a series of conquests. The East India Company, which was initially a purely commercial organization, eventually transformed into a powerful political force. However, merely conquering territories would not be enough to maintain the empire for an extended period. It was crucial to establish a comprehensive system of administration to sustain the empire. This unit focuses on the British perspective on governing India and the administrative institutions that were developed to effectively manage and control the Indian subcontinent.

The Background 

The extensive regions of India were governed by a large administrative framework consisting of numerous branches, all of which were regulated by a set of laws. Before delving into the intricacies of this system, it is important to understand the historical context behind these administrative developments. These changes in administration and law emerged from specific concepts that were prevalent in 19th century Britain. Additionally, these modifications served certain British interests in India. In this discussion, we will explore both of these contributing factors.

British Thinking on Administration

The British administrative and legal system in India was established over a period of eighty years and was influenced by various British thinkers and administrators. It evolved in the context of intellectual movements in late 18th and early 19th century Britain, which considered the administration of India as one of its main concerns.

• One of the early influences on the British administration in India was the idea of improvement, which aimed to create an English-style aristocracy in land as the best means of developing India. Cornwallis, an early British administrator, identified the Zamindars (landlords) as the trustees who would promote trade and production. The establishment of English-style law and administration, with separate revenue and judicial functions, aimed to ensure the improvement of India under this landed aristocracy.
• Macaulay, a liberal who was influenced by both the missionary zeal of evangelicalism and the emerging pragmatism of the 1830s and 1840s, took up the codification of laws with enthusiasm. However, he disagreed with the goal of reforming India as proposed by the institutionalists.

The intellectual current called 'utilitarianism', with major exponents such as James Mill, Jeremy Bentham, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill, played a significant role in shaping the administration and judicial system in India. Utilitarians' ideas on India can be summarized as follows:

• They viewed Indian society as lacking the values of rationalism and individualism, which they considered essential for building a modern society.
• They believed that a traditional and decadent society like India could be improved through proper legislation, which would impart "human justice" as opposed to the "divine justice" practiced in traditional societies. This meant that British administration, with its principles of justice and uniformity, could transform India into a progressive and dynamic society.
• However, the utilitarians rejected the idea of education as a means of improvement and did not support Indianisation of the government structure. They considered Indians unfit for the task of modernisation and advocated for a modern government machine run by the British.

From the 19th century onwards, European thinkers, scholars, and administrators debated the Indian problem and its solutions. The utilitarians, with their well-defined ideas and keenness on India, proved to be the most outspoken and effective. James Mill's appointment to the executive government of the East India Company in 1819 facilitated the implementation of utilitarian ideas in the Indian context.

Problems

• Indian society was backward, decadent, retrograde and despotic. There was degradation of the many by the few and absence of any security for the individual and his rights.
• This resulted in poverty, therefore crime
• Servility and superstition was (characteristic of Indian people)

Solution

• Advancement of society through'the establishment of a good government with good laws and sound administration.
• This would lead to freeing of individual initiative from despotism, customs and communal ownership (which Mill saw a sign of a primitive society and inhibiting the making of a civil society).
• This would give a free and full scope for capital and labour and place due emphasis on individual rights and ownership (as against communal ownership, characteristic of Indian society).
• Towards the same and it was necessary to legally define and protect individual right in land.

To put it briefly, the utilitarian thinking was an advocacy of a ‘Rule of Law’. Laws were to be scientifically defined and embodied in a written form in codes. They were to be irtiplemented through the creation of a body of local courts to make law accessible to every man. Only this could create an individualist competitive society.

British Interests
It is important to understand the various interests that influenced the introduction of British administration and law in India. The British aimed to create a uniform system of administration that served their requirements in India. However, these requirements evolved with changes in British interests in India and the representation of different social groups in Britain.
Initially, during the first stage of British rule in India, the primary interests were:

• The East India Company's monopoly on trade with India and the elimination of other European competitors,
• Controlling financial resources through taxation.

At this stage, there was no need to significantly alter existing institutions and administrative structures, as the British rulers, like traditional rulers, were mainly focused on appropriating agricultural surplus. Consequently, no attempts were made to create a uniform administrative structure, nor were any major changes introduced in the judicial system and administration. Instead, minor adjustments were made to the top of the revenue collection structure to ensure smooth revenue collection.
However, the situation changed dramatically after 1813. The Industrial Revolution transformed British society, and the mercantile trading corporations were replaced by the industrial bourgeoisie, which became the dominant force in Britain. The East India Company's monopoly on Indian trade weakened, and the British interests in India began to represent the interests of the industrial capitalist class. The British industrialists' goals shifted to using India as:

• a market for their manufactured industrial goods,
• a source of raw materials (such as jute and cotton) for their industries, as well as food grains and opium for export.

To achieve these goals, greater penetration into the Indian economy and society was required, as well as control over Indian trade with other countries. The traditional administrative institutions were no longer suitable for these new objectives, necessitating changes and transformations to better serve the new requirements. This led to the process of transforming the Indian administration and legal structure to promote modern business, create a market economy, free commercial relations, and regulate various economic transactions smoothly using modern laws. As a result, the transformation of the Indian administration and judiciary began to take shape to cater to the evolving British interests.

Institutional Framework

Having discussed the dominant British ideas oh the question of law and administration, let us now look at the framework of administrative institutions that evolved in the 19th century, and the extent to which the ideas discussed above, were incorporated into this framework.

The Judicial System

• The building up of an adequate structure of administration started taking shape from 1793 under Cornwallis, and continued, with interruptions, down the 19th century. During Cornwallis Governor Generalship important changes were made in all the branches of administration including the judicial system. These changes involved a divorce of revenue from civil administration, i.e., the separation of judicial from executive functions and the multiplication of judicial courts.
• The separation of civil and revenue administration meant, that the collector hitherto the holder of judicial and revenue responsibilities was now deprived of his judicial functions and concerned mainly with revenue. The collection of revenue and the administration of justice were now to be carried out by separate officials appointed for that purpose. There was now a collector responsible for the collection of revenue and a judge Magistrate with civil and criminal jurisdiction, Broadly the structure of the new judiciary was something like this
• Civil Courts
  (i) Sadar Diwani Adalat .
  (ii) Provincial Court 1-l.V
  (iii) District Courts Presided over by a District Magistrate from Civil Services
• Registrar’s Court
  (i) Subordinate Courts (Presided over by Indian Judges called Munsif and Amins)
• Criminal Courts
  (i) Sadar Nizamat Adalat (Sadar Fauzdari Adalat in Madras, Bombay)
  (ii) Court of Circuit (Presided over by Civil servants)
  (iii) Local Courts (Presided over by Indian Magistrates, called Principal Sadar Amin in Madras)

• The British first implemented a hierarchical system of courts in Bengal, which served as a testing ground for administrative experiments before being extended to the rest of India. The judicial structure in India evolved over time, with significant changes made in the 19th century.
• One key characteristic of the legal system introduced by the British was its tolerance towards existing traditional and religious laws. The criminal courts modified Muslim criminal law to make it less harsh, while civil courts continued to follow customary laws practiced by the local people. The East India Company did not attempt a complete overhaul of the system, only making partial modifications and retaining existing institutions of justice and revenue appropriation.
• Another notable aspect of the new judicial system was the establishment of a network of laws through enacting new legislation and codifying old laws, in line with the 19th century British passion for law codification. The traditional system had been based on customary laws, religious laws, and laws deriving from the authority of the rulers. In contrast, the British created a new system that introduced regulations, codified existing laws, and made them open to judicial interpretation and amendment.
• The Governor General-in-Council was granted all law-making authority through the Charter Act of 1833, and a Law Commission, headed by Lord Macaulay, was appointed in the same year. The commission prepared the Indian Penal Code, which was applicable throughout India, marking the first time a single set of laws covered all Indians.
• The principles of Rule of Law and Equality before Law underpinned the entire judicial system. The Rule of Law meant that the administration was conducted strictly according to specified laws defining people's rights, privileges, and obligations, rather than the personal desires of rulers. In theory, this meant that nobody was above the law, though in practice, the laws formulated and interpreted often allowed for oppression.
• Equality before Law, in theory, placed all citizens on an equal footing, irrespective of caste or status. However, this concept did not extend to Europeans, who had separate courts and laws. Achieving total equality before the law was difficult, but it did bring about some degree of national equality among Indians.
• Despite the noble principles of Rule of Law and Equality before Law, the Indian people faced many challenges in accessing justice. The legal process was expensive, complicated, and often out of reach for most people. People had to pay steep stamp fees and hire lawyers to navigate the complex laws. Additionally, seeking justice often required traveling to district towns or provincial centers, and legal proceedings could be lengthy, sometimes dragging on for years.
• However, the judicial system introduced in India did contribute to the process of unifying the country, at least in judicial terms. The British used the idea of legality as a means of controlling India, but in the 20th century, the same instrument of legality was employed by leaders of the national movement to defend civil liberties and challenge government authority within the limits of the law.

Administrative System

The main aim of the British administration in India was the maintenance of law and order and the perpetuation of the British rule. A fairly adequate body of written laws had already been created to facilitate the tasks of the administration. The three main pillars of the British administration in India were

• the civil service
• the Army, and
• the Police.

Let Us briefly see the composition and functions of each of them.

(i) The Civil Service

• The main job of the civil service was to translate law into action and the collection of revenue. The term ‘civil services’ was used, for the first time by the East India Company mainly to demarcate its civilian employees from their military and accessiastical counterparts. The service was initially only commercial in nature but was late transformed into a public service.
• From the very beginning it was a graded post—the gradations being—Apprentices, writers, factors, junior merchants then finally senior merchants. It was from senior merchants that appointments for higher services including the Governor were made. This system of grading continued till 1839.
• The appointment to these services was the sole prerogative of the court of Directors of the East India Company. These nominated civil servants indulged in corruption, bribery and illegal private trade. Cornwallis tried to check this corruption, arising out of apolicy of patronage practised by the court of Directors. He imposed certain restrictions on the civil servants (like forbiding private trade) but increased their salaries as a compensation. For instance, the collector of a district was to be paid 1300 a month, besides one per cent commission on the revenue collected from his distript. At this stage, the company’s service was perhaps the highest paid service in the World.
• All this, however, failed to solve the twin problems of corruption and inefficiency. Lord •Wellesly, who arrived in 1798 took significant stepts in this direction. He introduced the idea of a suitable training for the civil servants in India. He felt that the foundation of the training of the civil servants should be laid in England and further training imparted in India. This was founded the Fort William College in Calcutta on 24 November 1800, where the civil servants were to reveive training in literature, science and languages in India. After five years, an East India College was. established at Hailybury for imparting two years, training to young officers for the civil services. Indian Civil Services for the next fifty years or so remained the product of the Hailybury College.
• The method of recruitment, however, remained through the system of patronage in the hands of the court of Directors who were free to nominate their sons and nephews for the services.
• The idea of ‘competition’ for recruitment (as against nomination practised earlier) was introduced for the first time by the Charter Act of 1833. But it was to be a very limited competition and could be termed as nomination-cum-competition for recruitment. The Court of Directors were to first nominate four times the number of civil servants required. These nominated candidates had to go through a competitive examination, through which one fourth could ultimately be selected to join the coveted Civil Services.
• But gradually the demand for open Public competition started gaining ground. The Charter Act of 1853 ultimately took away the power of the court of Directors to make nominations and made a provision for open competition. For regulations regarding age, qualification and subjects for the competitive examination a committee was appointed headed by Macauly which was to submit its recommendations to the Board of control. Subsequently the college at Hailybury was abolished in 1838 and the competitive examinations became the sole responsibility of the Civil Service Commission. This competitive examination was to be held annually in England and it was therefore, virtually impossible for an Indian to compete in it.
• In late 19th century there began a demand that the competition examination should be held in India.

(ii) The Army and the Police

• Very little need be said about the other two pillars of British administration. The bulk of the Company’s army consisted of Indian soldiers. In 1857 the Indians constituted about 86% of the total strength of the Company’s army. The main reason for this large share of Indians, lay in the expenses involved in maintaining an exclusively British army. Also, given the Company’s expansionary policy company’s need to maintain a large army. How Company to rely on an army largely India. However, the officers of the army, as in other branches of administration, were exclusively British. The highest an Indian could reach was the post of a Subedar.
• The army played a crucial role in the expansion of British dominions over the Indian rulers. However, after the conquest over India was over and the rivalry with foreign powers eliminated. Keeping India under subjection became the main task of the army. A secondary task was to fight England’s wars with the Russian, or the French or with Indian neighbouring countries.
• Police, the third Pillar of the British administration was created by Cornwallis. So far, the function of the Police was performed-by Zamindar through their armed retainers. They were now stripped off their power, their armed retainers were disbanded and in its place, a police force was set up. This force was entirely at the command of the government of the East India Company. This force was grouped into Thanas, headed by a Daroga who was an Indian. These thanas were initially under the general supervision of the District Judge. Later the post of District Superintendent of Police was created to head the police organisation in the district. Finally the organisation of the police force was handed over to the civil service and the collector in the district also controlled the police. The main task of the police was to handle crime and also to prevent conspiracy against the British rule. Later, in the 20th century the police was employed in a big way to suppress the growing national movement.

Extent of Indian Participation

• The British judicial and administrative reforms in India were characterized by the lack of Indian participation in responsible positions. This aligned with the utilitarian thinking of the time, represented mainly by Mill, and Cornwallis, who initiated these reforms in India, appeared to have little faith in the efficiency and sincerity of Indians. As a result, Indians were only employed in subordinate positions such as Amin and Police Daroga. This policy extended to various branches of the government, including the army, police, civil services, judiciary, and engineering. In 1793, it was officially stated that all higher posts in administration with a salary of 500 a year or more could only be held by an Englishman. The British believed that an administration based on British ideas, institutions, and practices could only be firmly established by Englishmen, and their aim was to provide good administration for Indians rather than one run by them.
• However, after 1813, under Hastings, the process of gradual Indianization of the lower branches of services, primarily the judiciary, began. The rationale was that to make justice locally available, local people should be involved. Bentinck supported the inclusion of Indians, arguing that administration should cater to local needs, which could only be determined by Indians themselves.
• A significant reason for Indianization was the financial burden. The wars fought under Hastings, particularly the Anglo-Burmese war, led to a financial crisis, which was exacerbated by the need to expand the administration. Expanding the covenanted services held by Englishmen was virtually impossible, so to meet the need for more extensive administration while keeping costs low, Indians were recruited in large numbers for subordinate positions. This did not threaten British aspirants for lucrative Indian posts, as they did not wish to compete for lower-ranking jobs in India.
• During this period, the claims of the Indian people for a share in administration were publicly recognized, and the British Government provided justification in terms of justice, moral obligation, and local needs. A regulation in 1831 placed a large share of judicial responsibility in the hands of Indian judicial officers, and Auckland, who succeeded Bentinck, increased the power and salary of Indian judges. However, it is essential to note that top posts involving decision-making authority remained reserved for the British until the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when Indians began entering the prestigious civil services.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the British administration in India was primarily focused on maintaining law and order and perpetuating British rule. The judicial and administrative systems that were introduced in India were based on British ideas on governance and catered to British interests. The utilitarian thinking and the concept of 'Rule of Law' played a major role in shaping the legal and administrative institutions in India. While these institutions laid the foundation for a modern and unified India, they also had their drawbacks, such as increased expenses, complicated laws, and corruption. The Indian Civil Services, despite its challenges, evolved into one of the most efficient and powerful systems in the world, which Independent India inherited and continues to use today.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Law & Order Administration

What were the main ideas and influences behind the British administrative and legal system in India?

The British administrative and legal system in India was influenced by various intellectual movements in late 18th and early 19th century Britain, such as the idea of improvement, utilitarianism, and liberal thinking. These ideas focused on transforming India into a progressive and dynamic society through proper legislation, uniformity, and the rule of law while rejecting the traditional Indian way of governance and administration.

How did the interests of the British change in India over time?

Initially, the British interests in India were focused on the East India Company's monopoly of trade with India and the control over financial resources through taxation. However, after 1813, the interests shifted towards using India as a market for British manufactured goods and a source of raw materials for their industries, which required a deeper penetration into the Indian economy and society.

What were the main features of the British judicial system introduced in India?

The British judicial system in India involved the separation of judicial from executive functions, the establishment of a hierarchy of courts, tolerance towards existing traditional and religious laws, and the incorporation of the principles of the Rule of Law and Equality before the law.

What were the main pillars of the British administration in India?

The main pillars of the British administration in India were the civil service, the Army, and the Police. The civil service was responsible for translating law into action and collecting revenue, while the Army and Police maintained law and order and ensured the perpetuation of British rule.

How did the recruitment process for the Indian Civil Services change over time?

Initially, the recruitment process for the Indian Civil Services was based on patronage and nomination by the Court of Directors. However, with the Charter Act of 1833, a limited competitive examination was introduced. The Charter Act of 1853 further abolished the power of the Court of Directors to make nominations and made provisions for open competition, which ultimately became the sole responsibility of the Civil Service Commission.