Trail of Nand Kumar (1775): The Judicial Murder
Trail of Nand Kumar (1775): The Judicial Murder
The trail of Raja Nand kumar was the first decisive event
during the early stage of the growing bitterness between the Supreme Court and
the council . The case of Nandkumar stands in a class by itself . It brings out
the conflict between Warren Hastings and the majority in the council , on the
other hand , and the between the court and the majority , on the other , its
special significance lies in the fact that the judges of the Supreme Court
introduced English principles of law and procedure into India , laws which were
unknown to Indians before .
Nand
kumar was the prolege of the majority in the council and his trail before the
Supreme Court thus became in a way a trail of Strength between the Court and
the majority . This case illustrates forcefully the anomalous character of the
first impact of the English law on the Indians and depicts what kind of
difficulties arise when a foreign system of law transplanted suddenly in a
society and is enforced with all its rigors .
The
Supreme Court at Calcutta though established with the avowed object of protecting
the Indians against the oppressive activities of servants of the company was
not , however , an unmixed blessings to those Indians who fell within it’s
purview . The court’s Jurisdiction , powers, laws and language all were foreign
to the Indians and were completely out of harmony with their customs and
traditions . With the insistence of the council , began a new era in the
administration of justice in India . All the aspects of the matter were
dramatically brought out in the Nandkumar case and the trail gained great
historical importance as it formed an integral part of the charge on which
Warren Hastings and Impey were impeached by the House of Commons after their
return to England .
Events and Position of Nandkumar in the
Company before the trail
Raja Nand kumar an
influential man in Bengal who was once the governor of Hugli under Nawab
Siraj-ud-Daulah in 1756 . He did his job towards the company in a loyal manner
and that’s why he was named “Black Colonel” encouraged by the council majority
Raja Nand kumar brought some charges of bribery and corruption against Governor
General Warren Hastings in 1775 .
On 11th March
1775 , Nand kumar gave a letter containing complaints against Warren Hastings
to Francis , a member of the Council . Francis presented the letter before the
council , at it’s meeting , the same day . In his letter of complaints , Raja
Nand kumar stated that in 1772 Warren Hastings , when he was Governor ,
accepted from him a sum of 1,04,105 for appointing Gurudas as Diwan and from
Munni Begum a sum of 2,50,000 for appointing her guardian of the infant Nawab
Mubarak-ud-Daulah. On 13th March 1775 , the council received
another letter from Nand kumar . On the same day the council discussed the
subjects –matter of the complaint . In his second letter Raja Nandkmar offered
to produce vouchers supporting his charges of bribery against Warren Hastings .
In the council meeting Monson moved a motion to call Nand kumar before it .
Warren Hastings , who was presiding at the meeting as Governor
General opposed this motion , he was very much annoyed at this , he even left
the council meeting when these charges were being heard . A few days later ,
Mohun Pershad field certain charges of forgery against Nandkumar in the Supreme
Court . Nand kumar was tried by the Court with the help of a jury .
Warren Hastings left
the meeting and dissolved the meeting of the council and left his seat . The
majority of the members in the council expressed the view the Governor General
Warren Hastings was not empowered to dissolve the meeting of the Council .
Later in the place of
Warren Hastings the council elected Clavering to occupy the presiding seat at
the meeting . According to Monoson’s motion Raja Nand kumar was called before
the Council to prove his changes , Raja Nand kumar produced a
letter in Persian ,
which was written by Munni Begum to him . While examining Raja Nand kumar , the
members of the council asked a leading questions ,
" was he ever approached by Warren Hastings of his men for the letter of Munni Begum ? ”In his reply , Raja Nand kumar disclosed that Kanta Babu , Warren Hastings Bania came to him nearly four months ago to take this letter but the original letter was not given to him. "
Though Kanta Babu was
also called by the council to appear before it , he avoided appearing at the
instance of Warren Hastings .
The court by majority
dismissed Raja Nandkumar and found that the charges levelled by him against
Governor General Warren Hastings were true . They had held that Warren Hastings
received a sum of 3,54,000 as bribe . By a resolution therefore , the council
directed Warren Hastings to pay the same amount into the company’s treasury .
Main
Fact of the Trail
A few month later ,
Nandkumar was arrested with Fawkes and Radahcharan for conspiracy at the
instance of the governor general and Brawell . He and Brawell , Hastings
favorite members of the council , declared their intention before the judges of
the Supreme Court to prosecute Nandkumar , the Fawkes and Radhacharan for conspiracy
and this event made people think that with a relationship motive this step was
being against Nandkumar to ruin and disgrace him .
The trail of Raja
Nandkumar for conspiracy continued together with another trail
of his for forgery . In this conspiracy case , the Supreme Court
delivered it’s judgement in July 1775 . Fawkes was fired but
judgment was reserved against Nandkumar on account of the forgery case .
Those who criticized
the rule of Impey and Warren Hastings stated that somehow Hastings
felt that it would be difficult to involve Nandkumar in the
conspiracy case and so they pooled another charger , namely , forgery against
him and thus got rid of him under the provisions of English Act, 1729 . In 1775
, the case of forgery stand before the Supreme Court with respect to a bond or
deed claimed as an acknowledgement of debt from Bulaki Das , the Banker and he
said that the deed was executed by him in 1765 . On May 6 ,
1775 a charge of forger brought by Mohan Prasad before the justice of the peace
of Calcutta .
In Order to make
fruitful end Le Maistre and Hyde acted as Magistrate heard and
examined the evidence of the case till late at night . Being satisfied with the
evidence of the prosecution witness , the Magistrates , ordered the sheriff and
keeper of His Majesty’s prison at Calcutta to keep Nandkumar in safe custody he
discharged in due course of law .
On 8th May
,1775 the chief justice and three whom the trail of Raja
Nandkumar began , on the basis of a bond which was given by Mohan
Proshad to prosecute him. A member of 12 Jury , out of whom two were Europeans
and the rest were Europeans having resided in the town
of Calcutta for a long time , Mophan Prashad engaged
Durham as his counsel and Alexander Elliot acted as interpreter of the Court on
the advice of Vansittart .
Withoout any
adjournment for a period of eight days the trail of Raja Nandkumar
began on 8th June 1775 . The defense council first of all
advanced a plea as to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court . The judges
considered the plea unsupportable and allowed the defense counsel to withdraw
it because of two reasons ,viz.
(i) According to the law
as it existed at that time , if the plea as to the jurisdiction was decided
against , the defendant would be precluded from pleading not guilty to the
indictment .
(ii) Farrer, the defense
counsel also thought that if the judgment went against him, he might use this
plea sometimes later by a motion to check the effect of the judgment .
Nandkumar therefore ,
pleaded not guilty and stated that his entire transactions with Bulaki were
correct and genuine .
The Court
sat everyday at 8 a.m and the witnesses were examined till late at night . Due
to the ignorance of the judges about Indian habits and the nature of the
persons appearing as witnesses which caused delayed in some of the proceeding .
As the documents , statements and accounts were written in different language ,
it had to translate into English for the judges who were ignorant of these
mentioned language .
On this ground
Busteed Stated –
How complicating and
perplexing these must have seemed as well as the strange documentary exhibits
which , like the accounts , were in diverse languages and which , with every
word of the evidence had to be filtered to the understanding drop by drop
through an interpreter . The judges cross-examined the defense witness in
minute detail and thus carried out the plea that the kings ‘s counsel was
incapable of doing if efficiently . It was really very surprising and created
serious doubts and suspicions about the impartiality of the judges .
Final judgement
On 15th June
1775, the trail continued till the midnight to the morning . On 16th June
in the morning , Impey CJ summed up the whole case . the judges gave unanimous
verdict of “guilty” and the Jury also declared their verdict
of “guilty” .rejecting all defenses pleas the chief justice passed
the sentence of death on Nandkumar under an Act of British Parliament , which
was passed in 1729.
Last measures to save Nandkumar
Various efforts were
made to save Nandkumar from 16th June to 4 July . The defense
counsel decided to take an appeal to the King -in-council and
petitioned the court to stay the execution of the sentence so long as the
council’s decision was not known . The court rejected the petition. Efforts were
also made to seek the assistance of the members of the counsel but all efforts
proved in vain . Earlier in on 27th June , the Council received
a letter from the Nawab recommending suspension of the sentence until the
pleasure of His Majesty was known . The council forwarded this letter to the
Supreme Court . No Action was taken on it .
Raja
Nand kumar thus hanged on 5th August 1775 at 8 a.m. at Cooly
Bazar near Fort William .
Two important question raised in the
trail
Nandkumar case throws
interesting light on the early notions entertained by the Supreme Court .
First
, Weather Nandkumar was under the jurisdiction of the court ?
The Court held that
the Statute of 1728 was applicable to the Presidency town. Now , weather an
English Statute was applicable or not to a place depended on two factors :
(i)
Weather or not it was Suitable to the conditions prevailing
;
and
(ii)
The date the English Law was introduced there . Objection regarding the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over Nandkumar was based on the ground that
before advent of the Supreme Court , the Indians in Bengal were tried by their
own men in their own local criminal courts . In this case as the offence was
committed before the advent of the Supreme Court Nandkumar could be tried only
by Faujdari Adalats and not by the Supreme Court .
Regarding
applicability of the Act of 1729 to India and the execution of Nandkumar
for forgery , there was a difference of opinion even amongst the Judges .
Justice Chambers stated that the Act of 1729 was particularly adopted to the
local policy of England where for reasons political as well as commercial ,it
had been found necessary to guard against the Falsification of proper currency
and credit , by laws the most highly penal and that he thought the
same reasons did not apply the then state of Bengal . Impey , Hyde Le Maiste
regretted with chambers view . Impey CJ firm belief
First , that the statute of
1729 did apply to India , Second , that the English Criminal
law in general and the statute of 1729 in particular had been administrated in
India by English Courts that functioned before the advent of the Supreme Court
. Third, the judges had no option to try forgery under any
different law .
Impey therefore ,
argued that in 1726 king George I granted a Charter of Justice for the town of
Calcutta and thereby introduced English Law . On the surrender of that
Charter , a new Charter of justice was granted by king George II in 1753 . It
means that all criminal laws in force in England in 1753 became the laws of the
town of Calcutta . Thus the statute of 1729 was extended to India by the
Charter of 1753 as it was passed before this Charter .
Remark peculiar feature of the trail
Nandkumar trail
always been looked with suspicion . The decision of the Supreme Court in the
trail of Raja Nandkumar became a subject to great
controversy and doubts were also expressed regarding
certain peculiar features of the trail , viz.
- Charge preferred
against Nandkumar was shortly after he had leveled charges against
Hastings .
-
Impey CJ was close friend of Hastings .
- Every Judges of
the Supreme Court cross examined the defense witnesses due to which the
whole defense of Nandkumar collapsed . It was also not legal according to
the rules of procedure prevailing that time.
Criticizing the
attitude of the judges , H.E busted wrote -
“ The desire of the judges was to broke down Nand kumar’s
witness in particular the Chief justice’s manner was bad throughout and
that the summing up was unfavourable ”.
- After the trail , Nandkumar held guilty by the court ,
he filed an appeal before the Supreme Court for granting leave to appeal
to the king-in-council but the application was rejected without any
consideration .
- Nand kumar applied for mercy to his majesty but his
case was not forwarded by the Supreme Court . The Supreme Court was
empowered by the Charter of 1774 to reprieve and suspend such
capital punishment and forward the matter for mercy to his majesty . Earlier
in 1765 , a native named Radhacharan Mittre was tried in Calcutta for
forgery under the statute made applicable to Nandkumar and death sentence
was passed . “ A petition was sent to Governo Spencer from the native
community of Calcutta requesting either a reversal of sentence or a
respite pending an application to the throne ”. the prayer was granted and
Radha Charan got a free pardon from the King .
- Nand Kumar
committed the crime of forgery nearly about five years ago , much before
the establishment of the Supreme Court . Nand Kumar was sentenced to death
under the English statute of 1729 on a charge of forgery but this Act was
not applicable to India because English Law was introduced into India in
1726 and not in 1753 .
- Neither under
Hindu law nor under Mohammdan Law forgery was regarded capital crime .
Opinion
Many English
historian expressed the view that Nand Kumar was tried and executed by Impey at
the instance of Warren Hastings . “ Men will never agree” those who accuse
Impey and Hastings allege that Hastings first tried ruin Nand Kumar on a
conspiracy change , but after realizing that it did not implicate him directly
he got him capitally indicated on a charge of forgery preferred ostensibly by
Mohan Prasad .
By
J.F.Stephen
J.F Stephan made a
detailed study of the Nand Kumar case and Justifies the conduct
of both Impey and Hastings in the trail . He stated :
Mohan Prasad was the real substantial prosecutor of Nand kumar and that Hastings had nothing to do with the prosecution and that there was not any sort of conspiracy or understanding between Hastings and Impey in relation to Nandkumar or in relation to his trail on execution .
Macauly
Macauly critically
observes :
Impey
acted unjustly in refusing to respite nand kumar . No rational man can doubt
that he took this course in order to gratify Hastings .Hastings three or four ,
years later , described Impey as a man , to whose support he was at one time in
debated for the safety of his fortune , honor and reputations ; these strong
words can refer only to the case of Nandkumar ; and they must mean that Impey
hanged Nandkumar in ordered to support Hastings . It is , therefore , our
deliberate opinion that Impey , sitting as a judge , put a man unjustly to
death in order to serve a political purpose .
Criticism
Criticising Stephen
findings , Macauly said , The ostensible presecutor was a native . But it was
then , and still is , the opinion of everybody – idiots and biographers
excepted that Hastings was the real mover in the business . Beveridge changed
Impey and Hastings with conspiracy on the Supposition that no attempt had been
made to prosecute Nand kumar for forger before May 1775 . He claimed that in
order to defeat Nand kumar charges , which were pending in the Council Suborned
Mohan Prosad to prosecute him in the Supreme Court .
For holding the
opinion that no conspiracy existed between Impey and Hastings ,Stephen states
certain reasons . He points out that Nand kumar was tried by the whole court of
four judges and not by Impey alone . Apart from judges , the jury of 12 members
was also there . All these judges and jurors found Nand Kumar guilty . But
Beveridge alleges that throughout the trail manifested and ardent wish and
determined purpose to effect the prisoner’s ruin and execution and with this
aim in view he summed up the evidence with, “ gross and scandalous
partiality ”.
The legality of Nand
Kumar’s trail was questioned in the impeachment proceedings of Impey , before
the House of Commons on the scope of the applicability of the Act of 1729 in
India . During the debate on the impeachment motion , Sir Gilbert Elliot argued
in detail that the law rendereing forgery a capital offence did not extended to
India . Mill and beveridge held the same opinion . Even Stephen
appears to had doubt on the legality of the case being tried under the Act of
1729 . It also necessary to remember that Warren Hastings and Impey studied in
Westminster and since then they were very close friends .
Conclusion
:
Dr. Pandcy’s
conclusions may be stated as follows , that there existed no conspiracy between
Impey and Hastings to ruin Nand Kumar . The defense story was connected and
Nand Kumar ‘s witnesses were perjurers . Impey and the judges found Nand Kumar
guilty of forgery and legally executed him under the English Act , 1729 which
was rightly introduced in India . It was not in furtherance of any political
conspiracy that the judges refuse to respite Nand Kumar .
However , in
conclusion we may say that the trail of Raja Nand Kumar has a great historical
importance .
