Patna Case (1777-79)

On Shahbaz Beg Khan, a native of Kabul came to Bengal and served the
company for sometimes and retired. After retirement he settled at Patna and married
Begum by whom he had no children. His nephew, Bahadur Beg, came from Kabul to live
with him and remained with shah-baz Beg khan till his death (1776). He left behind him
considerable property. After his death his nephew, Bahadur Beg and his widow, Naderah
Begum, both claimed the whole property of deceased. His widow, Nederah Begum claimed
the property of deceased nephew, Bahadur Beg claimed the whole property of the deceased
as his adopted son. Bahadur Beg filed a petition against Naderah Begum in Patna Provincial
Council which as established as diwani Court under Warren Hastings plan 1774. In the
petition of Bahadur Beg stated that he was entitled to the whole property of the deceased
as his adopted son and that the provincial Council might direct it Mohammdan Law officers
(ie-kazi and Muftis) to ascertain his right over the property of the deceased.
He also stated that the widow of the deceased. Naderah Begum, had embezzled
some valuable of the deceased and that the same should be recovered from her for the
petitioner. He also prayed the Provincial Council to appoint guards to protects the property
of the deceased. On the petition of Provincial council issued an order to the Mohammadan
Law Officers (ie, Kazi and Muftis) to prepare inventory of the Property (collect the money
and goods and seal them up) and provide the safe custody and to make a written report to
the council as to the rights of the parties facc- to the ascertained facts and legal justice.
Thereafter the Mohammadan Law officers went to the spot and began investigation. During
the investigation they behaved with the widow. Nederah Begum very harshly and cruelly
and on account of such behavior of the Muslim law officers she was very much afraid and
fled from her house with some title deeds, etc. and took shalter in a Dirgah a holy place.
After investigation the Mohammedan Law Officers submitted a report of the Patna
Council. In the report it was stated that widow, Naderah Begum, claimed the entire property
of her deceased husband on the basis of Hibbanama (gift deed). Ekrar Nama and Mehar
Nama (dower dead), which she alleged, were executed by her husband during his life time.
Bahadur Beg challenged the genuineness of the deeds. They recommended that the
property of the deceased should be divided into four parts, where of there should be given
to Bahadur Beg, his father being the legal heir of the deceased and himself the adopted son
of the deceased and the fodurth part should be given to Naderah Begum, the widown of the
deceased on the ground that under Muslim Law the widow of an intestate was entitled only
one-fourth part of her deceased husband’s property. The Ratna Provincial Council without
making any further investigation ordered that the decision of the Law Officers should be
executed and the persons responsible for forgery should be put in confinement to be tried
for forgery in the Faujdari Adalat Naderah Begum refused to take one-fourth part of the
property. Ultimately, Naderah Begum brought an action in the Supreme Court against
Bahadur Beg, Kazi and Muftis for assault, battery, false imprisonment, breaking and
entering her house, seizing her effects and other personal injuries. For all those she claimed
damages amounting to Rs.6,00,000. Chief Justice, Imply was very critical of the activities
of the law Officers. The court consequently, awarded damage of Rs.3,00,000 against the
defendants for personal injuries to the widow, Naderah Begum and taking away her
property. The defendants were not able to pay damages and therefore they were ordered to
be imprisoned. The defendants were sent to Calcutta. The old Kazi died on the way and the
defendants remained in prison in Calcutta till 1781 when the British Parliament, by passing
an Act known as, the Act of Settlement, 1781 authorised the defendants to file appeal
against the judgement of the Supreme Court and thereafter the appeal filed on 28th July,
1784 and it was dismissed in 1789. Guard or sepoy be placed on the widow. Naderah
Begum, to force her to return to Bahadur Beg’s case. The Supreme Court tried the action
and found the whole proceedings of the Patna provincial council illegal, irregular and
corrupt and the judgement was delivered against the defendants (i.e., the members of Patna
Provincial Council) and the widow was awarded Rs.15,000 as damages. John Hyde as the
three Puisne Judges. They were Barristers of not less than five years standing. All the
judges were declared to be justices of the Peace and Coroners with in Bengal, Bihar and
Orissa. Jurisdiction of supreme Court – The various jurisdictions of the Supreme Court
were as under-(1) Original Jurisdiction in Civil Cases - the Court was authorized to hear,
examine, try and determine all civil causes, suits and actions against (i) The company (ii)
The Mayor and Aldermen of Calcutta (iii) The Crown’s subjects who were residents within
Bengal, Bihar and Orissa or who should have resided there or who should have any debts,
effects or estate, real or personal, with in the same (iv) Any person who was employed by,
or was directly or indirectly in the service of the company, or the mayor and Alderman or
any of the Crown’s subjects, and (v) Any inhabitant of India residing in the said provinces
if he entered into an agreement in writing with any of the crown’s subjects that in case of
dispute between them, the matter should be determined in the Supreme Court, provided the
cause of action exceeded the sum of Rs.500.