Mayors court

Mayors court( 1726)

• The Charter of 1726 issued by King George I.
• The charter established civil and criminal courts in the presidency towns which derived their authority not from the company but from the British crown.
• The advantage of having royal courts in India was that their decisions were as authoritative as those of the courts in England.
• The charter initiated the system of appeals from the courts in India to the Privy Council in England.
• Thus, the English law was brought in to India.Principles of English law was brought to decide the disputes.
• Codification of Indian law was initiated in 1833.
• The charter also established a local legislature in each presidency town.
• The Charter of 1726 constitutes a landmark in the Indian Legal history.
• But justice continued to be administered by non professional judges, no separation of power between the executive and the judiciary.
• Position of courts before 1726 and after.The decision of the Mayors court commanded respect in England as it was created by the Crown.It was not so in case of earlier court which was created by the company.

Provisions of the charter

• All the three presidency was to to have a corporation comprising of one mayor and 9 alderman.
• Out of the 9 alderman,two could be a subject of any prince or state having good relation with the Great Britain.Rest were to be British natural born subjects.
• Mayor was appointed for 1 year and after the expiry of term had to continue as an alderman.
• Alderman was appointed for life and in case of any vacancy the mayor and the remaining alderman would elect new alderman from inhabitants of the town.
• New mayor was to be elected by outgoing mayor and the alderman.
• An alderman could be removed on some reasonable ground by the governor and council subject to an appeal to King in council.

Thus, the attempt was to make the corporation autonomous, free from the control of the executive.

Judicial structure and composition in each presidency(civil jurisdiction)

• The mayor and the aldermen were to constitute the mayors court.
• The quoram of the court was to be three-the mayor or senior alderman with two other aldermen.
• The court was to hear and try all civil suits arising within the town and its subordinate factories.
• The first appeal within 14 days would go to governor and council.From where, further appeal lay with the King in council in all matters involving 1000 pagodas or more( then currency of Madras)
• Thus,for the first time,a right of appeal to the king-in-council from the decisions of the courts in India was graned.
• It was a court of record and had power to punish for contempt.
• Had testamentary jurisdiction, could grant probates of wills of the deceased persons.
• A sheriff was chosen annually by governor and council and functioned as police.
• The form of procedure in civil action was interesting.Court might issue warrant,bail might be allowed,defendant could be detained in custody,he could be imprisoned till the judgement was satisfied,property could be seized and sold.

Criminal Jurisdiction

• Vested in the governor and five senior member of the council.
• They were known as justices of peace.
• Arrest persons,punish.
• Three justices of the peace were to collectively form a court of record.
• Session was held four times a year to try and punish each and everycriminal offence except high treason.
• Trials were held with the help of grand jury and petty jury.
• All technical forms and procedures of the English criminal justice system was introduced.

Important points

-Seperation of power between the executive and judiciary was partially followed.
-Executive enjoyed a large share in the administration of justice as a criminal court and appellate court from the mayors court.
-Aldermen were either company’s servants or other English traders.
-justice administered by non professional judges.

Working of the judicial system:1726-1754

-Volume of litigation increased in each presidency town.
-Hostility and conflict between the government and mayors court.
-Too much interference by the government.
-Disagreed on the caste and religious matters of the natives.Govt.warned the court not to interfere in such matters.
-Dispute on the question of form of oath.Hindus to be sworn upon the cow instead of the Geeta.
-The governor and council usually reversed the decision of the court.
-Working of the mayors court also generated resentment amongst the Indians.The govt. usually sided with them.