Partial preview of the text
Download legal history book notes and more Study notes History in PDF only on Docsity!
THE PRIVY COUNCIL The King has been regarded as the fountain of justice in English legal system and in that capacity he could hear any petition filed by a par with respect to any matter. This was called the prerogative Power of the King which he exercised with the help of his Council, a body which came to be known as King-in-Council or more specifically the Priy Council, although the King was not personally present in that body. The Subjects of the British colonies were also regarded as the subjects of King and, therefore, the King could exercise his prerogative to hear their cases also. in what cases appeals of right could be pre However, it did not affect the appeal by its special leave an by special leave. Appeals from India Appeals from India could be filed as of right or with th i of the Privy Council. € special leave ferred to the King-in-Council. power of the King-in-Council to admit any d such appeals came to be called as appeals (1) Appeals as of Right—For the first time the Char . established the Mayor’s Courts made @ provision for 2 oon 4%, a the Privy Council against the decisions of the Mayor's Court PP those cases where the valuation of the suit was above 1000 pagodas. Th os 1774, after the establishment of the Supreme Court at Calcutta an a en ip could be made to the Privy Council in all cases with the leave an Supreme Court. The King-in-Council could tefuse such appeals In Madras and Bombay provision was made for an appeal th he High Courts anu tne rrivy Council 101 Be ine ] against the isi King-in Council against the decisions of the R ¢ ap ; S ecorder’s Court an they were oe by the Supreme Courts, then against the decisions of the Suprem ; oe 8, almost on the same grounds which were against th decisions of the Supreme Court at Calcutta, Tlowever, in case of Bombay , 2 y appeal could go to the King-in- ‘ fi a dae or more 8-in-Council only in the cases valuing 3000 In 1781, a provision for appeal from Mofussil area w which provided an appeal to the King-in-Council against the decisi f the Sadar Diwani Adalat in the suits of £5000 or more or. of Rs. 50,000 or more. In 1812 and 1818, provision was made for such appeals from the Sadar Diwani Adalats of Bombay and Madras respectively. No limitation of the valuation of suit was prescribed in case of Madras and in Bombay also the limitation of £5000 or more was done away in 1811. Thus, an appeal could be made against the decisions of the Sadar Diwani Adalat of Bombay and Madras even in cases of less amount. In 1862, when the High Courts were established at Calcutta, Bombay and Madras provision was made for an appeal to the Privy Council in civil and criminal matters. In civil matters an appeal could be made (1) in cases of the value of Rs. 10,000 or more or (2) in other cases if the High Court gave a certificate to file such appeals. An appeal could be filed even against the interlocutory orders of the High Courts. In criminal cases, an appeal could be filed against the decisions passed by the High Courts (1) in their original jurisdiction or (2) in those cases where a point of law had been referred to the High Court by a lower court. Similar provisions were made for appeals from other High Courts. 2. Appeal by special leave—As has been observed earlier, the King-in-Council always reserved a right to allow an appeal by special leave. The right was exercised in case of India also. However, the King-in-Council did not encourage such appeals and the discretion was exercised in very exceptional cases where non-exercise of such discretion was likely to cause some grave injustice to any party. “this jurisdiction was frequently approached by the people, it was exercised on more strict terms. The following lines from Ibrahim v. Rex? clearly depict the attitude of the Privy Council. “Leave to appeal is not granted except where some clear departure from the requirements of justice exists, nor unless by a disregard of the forms of legal process, or by some violation of the principles of natural : La 1. See Hull v. Macknna, 1926 IR 402; Motichand v. Gonga Singh, 20 IA 40. 2. 1914 AC 599. as also made In criminal cases where G PREEDS OO at PTE EN fi court in the establishment of ¢ aan the I for ape”! in and criminal n ‘ tins Rs: 10,000 or more or th atlers, In eno appeal could be made rc High c cases decided in the origi 0 the Co #8 igh Co urts in civil pa Provision wa ‘k ourt par er, if the valite of the 4 certificate of fit. itness 0. unci : -_ inal uy cil. In op which a law point was referr jurisdict; N crimin referred to the I tion of the High ‘Guatters, only Ourt or thos e in : as decided by the High Court, a High Court b Y a lower court and pvision applied to Hi na If igh Courts establghed on be made. Th ater, « ihe same Under the Governm ; . ent tablished in 1937 which or india qusitutiona) matters only origi decisions to the Privy Coun : An ap : ] with the leave of the Fed cu in cases deci ‘ avai j eral C cided in original ; against it The appeals, from the High Cou * by His Majesty ever jurisdiction or rts en in other cases Federal Court (Enlarge: i could gement of jurisdiction) Act empower In 1948, the owered the Federal Court to hear a i . and direct poke oa which the Privy Council could not touch the appeals in cri ivy Council were prohibited ear an appeal could be made to the P. riminal cases and even in oth : However, it did Court of His Majesty te Council with special Yeave of an appeal ES abolished on 24th September, 1 jurisdiction of the Privy cedera, sembly, and thus et, 1949 by an Act of oni , a two centuri ; of the Constituent tame to an end ies old relation with the Pri ‘ Reame the Co . On 26th January, 1950 the Supreme coe Council urt of last resort under the Constitution of indi of India la. Appraisal of the Privy Council The Pri : the tori, 4 Cound has been a unique judicial institution of its type in ; as contributed much in unifying the Commonwealth Countries : ; "Raditions an their relations by giving them common law and common . It made the maximum contribution to the legal development ork for India, there existed of Indi | 4 rst, vatiod same time when it began to w | Ttivy Council and most uncertain law. ising its jurisdiction the ch cil gave national character to our Jaw in contradiction to local in different parts of the “aracte: : . Country. which differed from place to place In . “Payeyt® field of Hindu and M “ thetactor cron role, At times mist Wards ha the Privy Council, yet in compari e development of law, the mi the Privy Council to the foreign contribution Nothing n law, ohammeda: urred due ici i islation well-entrenched in the dicial review of legisla’ va ernney al 1 : Even th aoe “Yen the origin of the institution of ju 1S On” 4 the Privy Council. 5¢¢ © 104 Indian Legal & Constitutional Histor, y could be a bett . er tribut . . K.M. + e to the Privy C h Munshi in the following aries ouncil than what was paid by “The Briti ee tichathd Ae and the Privy Council are the two great Privy Council durin € i. glo-Saxon race has given to mankind. The law. but coordi i e last few centuries has not only laid down i 7 linate the concept of right and obligations throughout a e dominions and colonies in the British Commonwealth. So fat as India is concerned, the role of the Privy Council has been one of the most important. Tt has been a great unifying force and for us Indians it became the instrument and embodiment of the rule of law, a concept on which alone we have based the democratic institutions which we have set up in out Constitution”. : 
