TRACING THE EVOLUTION OF CRIMINAL COURTS IN INDIA: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Author : Jiss Anthony, JSS Law College (Autonomous), Mysuru


Abstract

This article examines the development of India’s criminal courts over time, from antiquity to the present. Dharma served as the foundation for justice in ancient India, where rulers were crucial to the decision-making process. Islamic law had an impact during the Middle Ages, bringing with it specialized courts such as the Faujdari Adalat. By fusing Anglo-Saxon ideals with regional customs, British colonial control reshaped India’s judiciary and created a formalized legal system. The Supreme Court, High Courts, Sessions Courts, and Judicial Magistrates make up India’s post-independence criminal justice system, which maintains law and order. Justice and equity are further strengthened by constitutional protections and judicial activism.

Introduction

Over centuries, the Indian criminal justice system has undergone tremendous change as a result of British colonial reforms, medieval Islamic influences, and traditional customs. Dharma served as the foundation for India’s legal system in the past, with kings and other appointed officials upholding the rule of law. An organized judiciary that combined Indian customs and Anglo-Saxon legal traditions was brought about by the British. The Supreme Court, High Courts, Sessions Courts, and Judicial Magistrate Courts make up the current system, which serves as a strong tool to maintain law and order while meeting changing social demands.

Criminal Law Courts in Ancient India
During India’s Hindu era, the King played a central role in administering justice, personally overseeing criminal cases or appointing judicial officers like Mahadandadhikari, Nayayamimansak, or Dandadhish to deliver justice. The King retained the ultimate authority to modify punishments, acquit offenders, or grant royal pardons.


In the Vedic era, disputes were resolved within patriarchal families by the Grahapati, the household head. Manusmriti allowed the Grahapati to discipline dependents using non-lethal means. However, Vedic texts do not mention the King as a judge in civil or criminal matters.


A more advanced judicial system emerged during the period of the Dharamsutras and Kautilya’s Arthashastra. These texts emphasized the King’s sacred duty to punish wrongdoers, as failure to do so was believed to lead to eternal damnation. Manu stressed the importance of intelligence in crime prevention and investigation. To stay informed, Kings maintained covert intelligence networks to track crimes and administer appropriate punishments.


Kautilya’s Arthashastra, written in 310 B.C., offered detailed guidance on crime investigation, offender punishment, and crime control strategies. The King was the central authority in criminal justice, delegating responsibilities to deputies for enforcing laws and capturing offenders. Despite these developments, Hindu kingdoms lacked a formalized system of criminal courts, relying instead on the King’s discretion and support from his officials to maintain law and order.


Criminal Court’s of Medieval Period
The Nawab of Nazim oversaw the administration of criminal law during the Moghul era and made decisions on cases carrying the death penalty. Typically, a lower court known as Darogah-Adalat-al-alia made decisions on property-related offences. In addition to the Darogah, a judge known as the Fauzdar was tasked with trying all criminal cases—except those carrying the death penalty. Faujdari Adalat was the name of Fauzdar’s court. The petty police officer who handled matters involving drugs, alcohol, etc. was known as the Mohtassib. The Kotwals were responsible for maintaining law and order across the region. For Muslims, the Qazi enforced sacred law. He rendered decisions in cases involving marriage and family law. Divorce, inheritance, and Muslim-related criminal matters.

Hidaya and Farwa were the primary expounders of the Mohammedan criminal law. While Fatwa-Alamgiri was a compilation of case law intended to serve as a guide for criminal law courts, Hidaya included the fundamental ideas of Muslim criminal law. Even in the early years of British rule in India, the Fatwa of the Mohammedan law officer known as the Qazi was very important for the administration of criminal justice. Until the end of the eighteenth century, the system persisted.


Criminal Courts of British India
The management of criminal justice was transferred to British administrators when British rule over India began. They closely observed how the Moghul court system operated at the time and ultimately replaced it with their English-style judicial ideas. Their only goal was to eliminate the Moghul criminal law courts’ irrationality and give the locals the chance to have a fair and unbiased trial to boost their confidence. Anglo-Saxon legal ideas and the customs and traditions of the native population were mixed in the criminal justice system that the British colonizers brought to India. The criminal law court system that the British colonizers established in India was unquestionably effective for almost a century. It was so successful that, with a few minor adjustments here and there, the judicial system remained mostly unchanged even after Indian independence.

Criminal Courts of India after Independence
The following types of courts make up India’s contemporary judicial system, which is used to administer criminal justice:

1. The Indian Supreme Court
In the nation’s legal system, it is the highest court. The Supreme Court only has appeal authority in criminal matters, and even then, only in exceptional circumstances. Nonetheless, it can be said that efforts are underway to expand the Supreme Court’s appeal power in criminal matters. Additionally, there is a desire that the Supreme Court have appellate jurisdiction over instances in which the accused has received a sentence of ten years or more in jail. Additionally, the Supreme Court has writ jurisdiction to enforce basic rights.

The Supreme Court has recently begun giving victims of abuses of the criminal justice system monetary compensation, especially when the abuse of power by criminal law administrators violates Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees victims’ rights to life and liberty, or when there has been torture in custody. The criminal justice system is this. Undoubtedly a positive development for the criminal justice system.

The Supreme Court’s aggressiveness in alerting the negligent government to the misuse of power and authority is yet another noteworthy shift in the way it operates in the administration of criminal cases. Highlighting the Supreme Court’s activist role. While investigating the 2-G spectrum scan case, Justice Ganguly of the Court noted that “courts are now widening their jurisdiction and becoming the institutions of governance and are not merely as arbitrators of disputes.” Every day, judges and lawyers make headlines. 

2. The High Courts
Every State or one of the States has a High Court. In terms of state judicial authority, it is the highest. The appellate jurisdiction’s Articles 217 to 222 outline the requirements and qualifications for appointing judges to a high court. To execute any of the rights granted by Part III of the Indian Constitution, the High Court has the authority to grant specific writs to any individual, body, or even the government that is within its territorial jurisdiction. Additionally, the Court has the authority to supervise all lower courts and tribunals located within its territorial jurisdiction.

3. The Session Court
A Sessions Judge and one or more Additional Sessions Judges preside over the Court of Session in each District. In some circumstances. In the Sessions Court, assistant session judges are also appointed. The Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judge may impose any penalty permitted by law, but any death sentence he imposes needs to be approved by the High Court, which is his superior. However, the Assistant Sessions Judges lack the authority to impose a death sentence, life in prison, or a sentence longer than ten years. Both original and appellate authority are vested in the Sessions Court. The High Court of the relevant State appoints Sessions Judges, Additional Sessions Judges and Assistant Sessions Judges to preserve the judiciary’s independence.


4. The Judicial Magistrate Courts
In the District, there are several Judicial Magistrates’ courts in operation. The State Government establishes these courts after consulting the High Court. Both the State Government and the High Court appoint the Judicial Magistrates. Any member of the State’s judicial service serving as a judge in a civil court may be granted the authority of a Judicial Magistrate of the first or second class by the High Court whenever it sees fit or necessary.

Not all districts are metropolitan areas. A Judicial Magistrate of the first class will be appointed Chief Judicial Magistrate by the High Court. Any first-class judicial magistrate may be appointed by the High Court to serve as an additional chief judicial magistrate in a district. Any first-class judicial magistrate in any subdivision may be appointed the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate by the High Court. To administer criminal justice in the Division, the Chief Judicial Magistrate oversees several Judicial Magistrates of the second class called Special Judicial Magistrates.

Conclusion


India has a rich legal legacy that is reflected in its criminal justice system, which blends traditional customs with contemporary legal theories. Through a complex legal system, it upholds justice despite obstacles, aiming for equity and constitutional compliance. The Supreme Court’s dynamic role in upholding the rule of law and defending citizens’ rights is highlighted by ongoing changes and judicial activism.

References:


Sen P.K. Penology Old and New 1943,
Manusmriti XI,324
Vardachariar’s: Hindu Judicial System (1946)
Dr.Paranjape N.V : Indian Legal and Constitutional History (Sixth Edition,2006)
Case Laws : SAHELI v. Commr.of Delhi, AIR 1983 SC516 ; Nilabati Behera v.State of Bihar AIR 1993 SC 1134; Sebastain M. Hongray v. Union of India AIR 1984 SC 1026; State of U.P v. Krishna Master & Ors. AIR 2010 SC 3071.


FAQS


1. What served as the cornerstone of ancient Indian justice?
Dharma was the cornerstone of justice in ancient India. Whether directly supervising cases or assigning tasks to designated officials such as Mahadandadhikari, Nayayamimansak, or Dandadhish, kings were instrumental in the administration of justice.

2. How were conflicts settled in the Vedic era?
The Grahapati, the leader of the household, was responsible for resolving conflicts in patriarchal households. Although the Grahapati was allowed to chastise dependents using non-lethal methods by the Manusmriti, the King was not mentioned in Vedic scriptures as a judge in civil or criminal cases.

3. In terms of criminal justice, what function did Kautilya’s Arthashastra serve?
In response, Kautilya’s Arthashastra included comprehensive instructions on how to investigate crimes, punish offenders, and implement crime control measures. It underlined the King’s obligation to punish wrongdoers and suggested keeping secret intelligence networks in place to deter crime.

4. During the Mughal era, which were the principal criminal courts?
The following were important criminal courts in the Mughal era:
Under the direction of the Fauzdar, the Faujdari Adalat handles all criminal matters, with the exception of those that carry the death penalty.
Darogah-Adalat-al-alia: Addressed offenses pertaining to property.
The Qazi Court dealt with issues pertaining to Muslim personal law, such as inheritance, divorce, and marriage.

5. How was the criminal court system in India reformed by the British?
By fusing regional customs with Anglo-Saxon legal principles, the British established a codified judicial system. They sought to offer impartial and equitable trials while doing away with the illogical traditions of the Mughal courts. The foundation of India’s contemporary criminal courts was established by this system.

6.After independence, which are India’s main criminal courts?
The following are India’s main criminal courts:
Supreme Court: The highest court with the authority to hear appeals in criminal cases.
The highest court in a state is called the High Court.
Sessions Courts: Serious criminal charges are handled by district-level courts.
Judicial Magistrates’ Courts: Founded by the state government after consulting with the High Court, these courts handle less serious criminal cases.

7. How does the criminal justice system use the Supreme Court?
In criminal cases, the Supreme Court primarily has appellate authority. Additionally, it compensates victims of abuses by the criminal justice system and employs writ authority to protect fundamental rights. It acts as an activist to ensure justice and draw attention to government incompetence.

8. What impact has judicial activism had on the criminal justice system in India?
Judicial activism has improved criminal justice administrators’ accountability. The Supreme Court has actively participated in ensuring that constitutional rights are upheld and providing restitution for abuses of authority. It now has more authority to deal with structural problems in governance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *