Constitutional History for Independence of India

Introduction:

The Supreme Law of India is the “Indian Constitution,” which is proudly the world’s largest Constitution. A constitution is a legally binding document that establishes the legal framework of a country as well as the primary functions of government organs. It also lays out the major guidelines for how those government organs should operate. The Indian Constitution, which is a perfect blend of rigidity and flexibility, is also the most frequently amended Constitution in the world. The Indian Constitution was adopted on November 26, 1949, by the Constituent Assembly of India, which was chaired by Dr. Rajendra Prasad.

The Constitution of India, which took effect on January 26, 1950, replaced the Government of India Act 1935. Regardless of the criticism leveled at the constitution for being a collection of best flowers plucked from various gardens, it is a bouquet of best flowers plucked from various gardens. In the words of Dr. BR Ambedkar, “Nobody holds any patent rights in the fundamental ideas of the Constitution.” The borrowings were well justified by the constitution-makers. The Indian Constitution was derived from a variety of sources, including government acts and the constitutions of other countries. As a result, the borrowed provisions aided the Constitution in building on humanity’s collective learning.

Various Missions

The Regulating Act, 1773

The East India Company’s territorial acquisitions had a startling effect in England. Two parliamentary committees have been formed to investigate the Fast India Company’s operations. The Company’s servants were concentrating on their own business. The Company’s business was being neglected. The Company had almost forgotten about trade and was increasingly focused on conquering new territory. This necessitated the deployment of large armies. The Governor-General was named after the Governor of Bengal. The Governor-General was given full control of Bengal’s civil and military administration. A four-member executive council was established to advise and assist the Governor-General[1]. The Governor-General has the authority to direct and supervise the two Presidencies. Without the approval of the Governor-General-in-Council, these Presidencies could neither declare war nor make peace with any power. The Company’s employees were not allowed to accept any bribes or gifts from anyone. They could be sent back to England as a punishment if it was a serious matter.

The Settlement Act, 1781

The year 1781 is the most significant historical epoch currently under consideration. It brought to an end a period of bitter animosity and struggle between those who wanted English laws and Courts of Justice immediately introduced into the country and made supreme over the Executive, and those who believed that such a policy was completely impracticable, and that, given the circumstances of the English at the time, Government would have to control the Courts’ authority for a long time. It marked the beginning of an era of independent Indian legislation of the Supreme Court’s authority, which was more or less exercised for the next eighty years and of the establishment of a Board of Revenue entrusted with the charge and administration of all the province’s public revenue, and invested in the fullest manner with all the powers and authority, all under the control of the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor. The Regulating Act had numerous flaws, which were acknowledged by all hands, and an Act was passed in 1781 to correct them. The new Act stated that the Company’s public servants would not be subject to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction for actions taken in their official capacity. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction was also waived for revenue collectors and judicial officers of the Company courts. The Governor-General and members of the Council of Ministers were also exempted from the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction, both individually and collectively, “for anything counseled, ordered, or done by them in their public capacity.”[2]

The Pitt’s India Act, 1784

In 1784, shortly after taking office as Prime Minister of England, Pitt the Younger introduced a bill to give England letter control over the Indian administration. The bill became known as the Pitt’s India Act after it was passed.

The passage of this Act was influenced by several factors.

There were numerous flaws in the regulating Act of 1773 that required reform by the British Parliament if the company’s administration in India was to be on a sound footing.

In 1783, the various American colonies became relatively independent of British control, and the English were understandably concerned that India would follow suit. As a result, it was thought necessary to exert greater control over the East India Company’s operations in India. The most important provisions, the company’s political and commercial activities were now separated.

The Board of Directors was allowed to perform commercial functions, but a Board of Control was established in England to supervise, direct, and control the Indian government. Bombay and Madras were now firmly under the Governor General’s and his Council’s control.

The Charter Act, 1793

In 1793, the English East India Company received a new charter. The Act of 1793 is quite lengthy. Many old laws were repealed, and others were consolidated. It did not, however, make any changes. The Governor-General and the Governors were given the power to override their councils under the provisions of the Charter Act of 1793. It was decided that when the Governor-General assumed the presidency, he would take over from the Governor. The Governor General was given the authority to choose the vice-president of his executive council from among its members. When the Governor General was away from Bengal, the vice-president was to fill in for him. Unless the court of Directors specifically appointed him, the Commander-in-Chief was not to be a member of the Governor General’s Council. The Calcutta Supreme Court’s admiral jurisdiction was extended to the high seas. It was stipulated that the members and staff of the Board Control be paid from Indian revenues. This system was in place until 1919. The company’s character was renewed for another 20 years at 3000 tonnes. The 1813 Charter Act This Act was in effect for twenty years, from 1993 to 1993. The Charter Act of 1813, which replaced the previous charter act of 1793, was passed by the British Parliament.

The Charter Act, 1833

The Charter Act of 1833, out of all the Acts passed by the British Parliament to regulate the East India Company’s affairs, stands out as the most comprehensive and far-reaching in effect. The Act was necessary because of circumstances in both India and England. Macaulay was the Act’s first Law Member, as well as the President of the Law Commission.

The Government of India Act, 1858

The Government of India Act of 1858 was a British parliament act that transferred the East India Company’s government and territories to the British Crown. The company’s rule over British territories in India came to an end, and the territories were handed over to the British government directly. The Revolt of 1857 hit the British government like a tonne of bricks. In Britain, there was widespread resentment of the company, which was blamed for the revolt because of its policies. As a result of this Act, Queen Victoria, the monarch of the United Kingdom, became the sovereign of British territories in India and was given the title “Empress of India.” The East India Company was liquidated, and the Secretary of State for India was given control of the Company’s Board of Directors. This act established India as a direct British colony, abolishing the Pitt’s India Act’s dual government and putting an end to the doctrine of lapse[3].

Significance

The passage of the Act for Better Government of India in 1858 was a watershed moment in Indian history. It marked the end of one of India’s most illustrious periods, the rule of the East India Company, and the beginning of a new era of direct crown rule. The Company’s corpse was merely buried under the Act of 1858. The act of 1858 was the final nail in the coffin of the much-maligned double government system[4]. It eliminated the dispersal and dissipation of responsibility that resulted from the government’s division of power between the court of Directors and the Board of Control. Only the Entrant was affected by the Act, and only minor changes were made in India. However, the Act did not grant Indians political rights or allow them to participate in the administration of their country.

The Indian Council Acts, 1861

The Indian Council Act of 1861 was enacted to address the need for Indian cooperation in the country’s administration. For executive legislative purposes, the act restored the Government’s power and the composition of the Governor General’s council. The Indian Council Act of 1861 was enacted to address the need for Indian cooperation in the country’s administration. For executive and legislative purposes, the act restored the government’s power and the composition of the Governor General’s council. It was the first time the portfolio of the Governor-Council General’s was included. The role of the legislative council was limited. It was primarily advisory in nature. The Indian Council Act of 1861 fulfilled the aspiration of associating Indians, fixed India’s broken legal system, and defined the legislative councils’ powers. In summary, the act established the administrative system in India, which lasted until the end of British rule.

The Indian Councils Act, 1892

The Indian Council Act of 1892 was a British Parliament Act that increased the size of legislative councils in British India, laying the groundwork for India’s parliamentary system. It is regarded as a watershed moment in the country’s constitutional development. The Indian Council Act of 1892 was enacted by the United Kingdom Parliament to empower legislative councils in British India by increasing their size, laying the groundwork for India’s parliamentary system. During the 1885-1889 session of the Indian National Congress, the Indian National Congress made some demands.

Indian Council Act 1909 (Morley-Minto Reforms)

The partition of Bengal was carried out by Lord Curzon in 1905. Following the Bengal uprising after partition, the British authorities recognized the need for some reforms in Indian governance. The Indian National Congress (INC) also pushed for more reforms and Indian self-government. Previously, Congress leaders were moderates, but now extremist leaders who believed in more aggressive tactics were on the rise. In 1906, the INC demanded home rule for the first time

Negative Effects

To widen the chasm between Muslims and Hindus, separate constituencies were created. In India’s polity, this system ushered in a period of extreme communalism. The Morley-Minto Reform kept people from focusing on political and economic issues that affected all Indians, whether Hindu or Muslim. The councils’ size was increased, but their functions and powers were not expanded. Although the Provincial Councils had a non-official majority, the actual result was not significant because the non-official majority was nullified by the election of nominated members. The Governor-position General’s and veto power remained unaffected by the Act. Members were able to discuss the budget, but they were unable to make any significant changes to it. The resolutions acted as recommendations to the government and were not legally binding. They had the ability to ask questions but not to compel the executives to respond.

Positive Effects

It was a positive step toward elected Indians working with the administration in a responsible manner. For the first time, members had the opportunity to criticize the executives and make suggestions for bettering the country’s administration. The government was supported by Congress’s moderate leaders. On the one hand, they were successful in implementing reforms, but on the other hand, they lost their popular support. Furthermore, the government did nothing substantive in response to Congress’s demand for self-government, as Lord Minto made it clear that Colonial self-government was inappropriate for India, and he was also opposed to the introduction of Parliamentary or Responsible Government.

The Government of India Act, 1919 (Reforms of Montagu and Chelmsford)

The Government of India Act of 1919, also known as the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, was passed in 1919 and went into effect in 1921. It was established in the British Indian polity to introduce Diarchy, or the rule of two, which consists of executive councilors and popular ministers. During World War I, Britain and its allies declared that they were fighting for national freedom. Many Indian leaders believed that India would be granted Swaraj after the war. The British government, on the other hand, had no intention of giving in to the Indian people’s demands. The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, also known as the Government of India Act, 1919, brought about changes in the administrative system.

Simon Commission, 1927

In 1927, the British government appointed the Simon Commission, headed by Stanley Baldwin, to report on the functioning of the Indian Constitution, which was established by the Government of India Act, 1919. In addition, in 1928, a group of seven British MPs was dispatched to India to study the Constitution and make recommendations to the government. The Commission was entirely made up of British citizens. Simon Commission was boycotted because of the outrage among Indians over their exclusion from the Commission, the Congress Party decided to boycott the Simon Commission’s meeting in Madras. The Muslim League soon followed suit and boycotted the Simon Commission. Opposition to the Commission resulted in large-scale black flag protests, hartals, and major demonstrations across the country. Throughout the country, chants of “Simon go back” could be heard. Act of the Government of India, 1935

The Government of India Act, 1935

The second major step in India’s transition to a fully responsible government. It brought an end to the Diarchy and allowed for the formation of the All India Federation. The experiment of provincial autonomy served some useful purposes under this act, so it can be said that the Government of India Act 1935 marks a point of no return in India’s constitutional development. The Government of India passed the longest act, the Government of India Act 1935, under the British Act of Parliament in August 1935. The Government of Burma Act 1935 was also included in this act[5]. India would become a federation under this act if 50 percent of Indian states agreed to join.

The August Offer

The Viceroy of India, Lord Linlithgow, made the so-called “August Offer” at Shimla on August 8, 1940, early in the Battle of Britain, promising the expansion of the Executive Council to include more Indians, the establishment of an advisory war council, giving full weight to the minority opinion, and recognition of Indians’ right to frame their constitution. In exchange, all parties and communities in India were expected to support Britain’s war effort.

Cripps Mission

In March 1942, the British government dispatched the Cripps Mission to India in order to secure Indian cooperation in support of British war efforts during world war II. Sir Richard Stafford Cripps, a Labour minister in Winston Churchill’s British coalition government, was in charge. Japan was advancing beyond India’s eastern borders, and the fall of Burma came as a shock to the British in the war. The threat of a Japanese invasion of India loomed large, and Indian support for Britain’s war efforts was critical. When World War II broke out in 1939, Viceroy Lord Linlithgow declared India to be a participant in the conflict as part of the British Empire. This was done without consulting Indians, which sparked widespread outrage from the Congress Party, prompting the British government to dispatch Cripps to India[6].

Importance

The British government acknowledged India’s right to be a dominion for the first time. Indians have the ability to write their constitution. The proposal to allow provinces to form their union proved to be a model for the country’s partition in 1947. During the interim, Indians have assured a significant role in the administration.

Cabinet Mission

The decision to send a Cabinet Mission was made on January 22, 1946, and the British Prime Minister, C.R. Attlee, announced the mission and the plan to leave India in the House of Lords on February 19, 1946. To end the political impasse between the Indian National Congress and the All-India Muslim League over whether British India would be better off unified or divided, and to avoid a communal conflict. The Congress party desired a powerful central government with greater powers than state governments. Under Jinnah’s leadership, the All India Muslim League wanted to keep India united, but with political safeguards for Muslims, such as a “guarantee” of “parity” in legislatures. This plan was announced on May 16, 1946, and was preceded by the Simla Conference of 1945.

The Quit India Movement, 1942

Mahatma Gandhi launched the Quit India movement from the Gowalia Tank Maiden in Mumbai, also known as August Kranti Maidan. On the 8th and 9th of August, 1942, he and other leaders gathered here. Congress was declared an unlawful association as a result of the movement, and its offices across the country were raided. The leaders were apprehended, and the incident resulted in a chaotic situation. On August 9, 1942, the Indian National Congress (INC), led by Mahatma Gandhi, officially launched it. The movement’s slogan was “Quit India” or “Bharat Chodo.” Gandhi gave the people the slogan, “Do or die.” It was supposed to be a peaceful, nonviolent movement to persuade the British to grant India independence, according to the Congress ideology. The Congress Working Committee in Bombay passed the Quit India Resolution on August 8, 1942. Gandhi was chosen to lead the movement.

The Indian Independence Act, 1947

The 1947 Indian Independence Act was enacted by the United Kingdom’s Parliament, and it partitioned British India into two new independent dominions, India and Pakistan. Lord Mountbatten and representatives from the Indian National Congress, the Muslim League, and the Sikh community reached an agreement on the 3 June Plan, also known as the Mountbatten Plan. This was the final strategy for achieving independence. Attlee’s announcement in context The British Government would grant full self-government to British India by June 3rd, 1948, at the latest, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom announced on February 20th, 1947. The future of the Princely States would be decided after the date of final transfer is decided.

Conclusion

Our Constitution, according to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, is a “bag of borrowing.” It can be seen why he named it that way now. The influence of international constitutions has aided our constitution in obtaining key elements such as fundamental rights and responsibilities, judicial review, preamble ideas, basic structure doctrine, and so on. It aided in the establishment of the rule of law, ensuring that there would be no monarchy, fascism, or single-party rule. Equal protection under the law and equal treatment in front of the law is guaranteed by our Constitution. The three branches of government, the legislature, executive, and judiciary, are separated and delegated by the constitution. The constitution’s rules, which established a parliamentary form of democracy, have been linked to a stronger economy in India. Indians may not always understand all of the procedural details of this lengthy and imperfect document, but they understand that they are governed by the words of the Constitution rather than the whims of political avarice. And that is something to be proud of on Republic Day.

---

References:

[1] V.N. SHUKLA, THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (13th Ed., 2019)

[2] M.P. JAIN, INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1178 (8th Ed., 2019)

[3] Golaknath v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1967 SC  1643

[4] Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225

[5] Marbury v. Madison, (1803) 5 US 137

[6] Dr. Naresh Mahipal, A study on the Impact of the World Constitutions on the Framing of Indian Constitution, 3, Issue 1, January- March (2018)