Consider the following: 1. Warren Hastings was the first Governor General who established a regular police force in India on the British pattern. 2. A Supreme Court was established at Calcutta by the Regulating Act, 1773. 3. The Indian Penal Code came into effect in the year 1860. Which of the statements is/are correct?

1. Transition from Dual System to Company Rule (basic)

To understand the British administrative journey, we must start with the chaos that necessitated reform. After the Battle of Buxar (1764), the British East India Company (EIC) didn't immediately rule Bengal. Instead, Robert Clive introduced the Dual System of Government (1765-1772). Under this arrangement, the Company held the Diwani (the right to collect revenue), while the Nawab of Bengal retained the Nizamat (administrative and judicial functions). In simpler terms, the British had all the power and money without any responsibility, while the Nawab had all the responsibility without any resources to fulfill it.

This system proved disastrous. Without accountability, Company officials engaged in rampant corruption, leading to a massive drain of wealth — nearly £ 5.7 million was drained from Bengal in just three years Bipin Chandra, Modern India (Old NCERT), The British Conquest of India, p.72. The situation peaked with the Great Bengal Famine of 1770, where nearly one-third of the population perished. Because neither the Company nor the Nawab felt responsible for public welfare, the rural economy collapsed Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.93. This crisis forced the British Parliament to intervene, signaling that a merchant company could no longer act as a lawless sovereign.

The turning point came in 1772 when Warren Hastings was appointed Governor of Bengal. His first major task was to abolish the Dual System and bring the administration directly under the Company's control. This transition was formalized by the Regulating Act of 1773, which elevated Hastings to the post of Governor-General of Bengal History Class XI (Tamilnadu State Board), Effects of British Rule, p.265. This shift transformed the EIC from a mere trading body into a political entity responsible for the governance, justice, and security of its Indian territories.

Sources: Modern India (Bipin Chandra, Old NCERT), The British Conquest of India, p.72; A Brief History of Modern India (Rajiv Ahir, SPECTRUM), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.93; History Class XI (Tamilnadu State Board), Effects of British Rule, p.265

2. The First Judicial Framework: Adalats and Courts (intermediate)

To understand the British judicial system in India, we must look at it as a transition from a decentralized, custom-based system to a centralized, formal hierarchy. The foundation was laid by Warren Hastings in 1772 when he abolished the Dual System of administration Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.93. Hastings established a dual court structure in each district: the Diwani Adalat (Civil Court) and the Fauzdari Adalat (Criminal Court). In these early stages, the Diwani Adalats were often placed under the Collector, while Fauzdari Adalats remained under Indian officers like Qazis and Muftis, though under British supervision Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.521.

A pivotal moment occurred with the Regulating Act of 1773, which established the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William (Calcutta) in 1774. This court, with Sir Elijah Impey as its first Chief Justice, represented the first attempt to introduce English law and formal judicial procedure to the presidency History Class XI (Tamilnadu State Board), Effects of British Rule, p.265. However, the system truly crystallized under Lord Cornwallis in 1793. Cornwallis introduced the principle of Separation of Powers, ensuring that the Collector, who was responsible for revenue, did not also hold judicial authority. This led to the creation of a distinct cadre of District Judges Modern India Bipin Chandra, Administrative Organisation, p.111.

Feature	Diwani Adalat	Fauzdari Adalat
Jurisdiction	Civil matters (property, marriage, etc.)	Criminal matters (theft, assault, etc.)
Governing Law	Personal laws (Hindu Shastras/Muslim Shariat)	Muslim Criminal Law (gradually modified)
Presiding Authority	Initially Collectors; later District Judges	Indian Officers (Qazis) supervised by British

As the empire expanded, the British moved toward codification to ensure uniformity. Under the influence of Thomas Babington Macaulay, the first Law Commission was established in 1834. This eventually led to the enactment of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 1860, which replaced the diverse personal and customary criminal laws with a single, uniform legal code for all of British India.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.93; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.521-522; History Class XI (Tamilnadu State Board), Effects of British Rule, p.265; Modern India Bipin Chandra (NCERT), Administrative Organisation and Social and Cultural Policy, p.111

3. The Cornwallis Code and Separation of Powers (intermediate)

To understand the Cornwallis Code of 1793, we must first look at the problem it sought to solve: the concentration of power. Before these reforms, the District Collector was a 'mini-monarch' who collected revenue, acted as a magistrate, and even decided civil cases. This created a massive conflict of interest—if a peasant had a grievance against the revenue department, they had to appeal to the very person (the Collector) responsible for that department!

Lord Cornwallis believed that "liberty and property" could only be protected if the executive and judicial functions were kept separate. This led to the cornerstone of his reforms: the Separation of Powers. Under the Cornwallis Code, the Collector was stripped of all judicial and magisterial duties, focusing solely on revenue administration Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.522. A new office, the District Judge, was created to head the civil courts (Diwani Adalats), ensuring that the person collecting the money was not the same person judging the legality of that collection Bipin Chandra, Modern India, p.111.

This reform introduced a revolutionary concept to British India: the Sovereignty of Law. For the first time, government officials were made legally answerable to civil courts for actions performed in their official capacity. Even European subjects were brought under the jurisdiction of these local courts Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.522. By establishing a clear hierarchy of courts—from the humble Munsiff’s Court up to the Sadar Diwani Adalat—Cornwallis aimed to create a predictable, rule-bound administrative machinery.

Feature	Pre-1793 System	Cornwallis Code (Post-1793)
Collector's Role	Revenue + Judicial + Magisterial	Revenue Administration Only
Judiciary	Under the Executive (Collector)	Independent District Judge
Accountability	Officials were largely above the law	Officials answerable to Civil Courts

Sources: Modern India (Bipin Chandra), Administrative Organisation and Social and Cultural Policy, p.111; A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.522

4. Evolution of the Civil Services in India (intermediate)

To understand the Evolution of the Civil Services, we must first look at why they were created. Initially, the East India Company was a commercial entity, and its "servants" were simply traders. However, once the Company transformed into a political power, these same traders became administrators. This led to massive corruption because they were paid low wages but were allowed to engage in private trade, essentially using their administrative power for personal profit.

Lord Cornwallis (Governor-General, 1786–93) is known as the 'Father of Civil Services in India' because he was the first to organize and professionalize this machinery. He realized that a purification of the administration was impossible without paying officials well. Consequently, he raised salaries, strictly forbade private trade, and ensured that promotions were based on seniority Modern India, Bipin Chandra, History class XII, p.108. He also introduced the Cornwallis Code, which separated revenue collection from judicial powers—depriving Collectors of their judicial functions to prevent the concentration of too much power in one hand History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), p.269.

As the empire grew, the need for trained officials led to the establishment of Fort William College in 1800 by Lord Wellesley for the training of new recruits. However, the biggest structural shift occurred with the Charter Act of 1853. Before this, recruitment was based on nomination by the Company's Court of Directors (favoritism). This Act introduced an open competition system, effectively ending the patronage of the Directors. To implement this, the Macaulay Committee (the Committee on the Indian Civil Service) was appointed in 1854 Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity, p.4.

Feature	Pre-1853 System	Post-1853 System
Basis of Recruitment	Patronage/Nomination by Directors	Merit-based Open Competition
Training	Haileybury College (England)	Examination in London (initially)
Indian Participation	Exclusively British (Covenanted)	Theoretically open to Indians

Later, under Lord Lytton (1878-79), an attempt was made to appease Indians through the Statutory Civil Service. This system allowed one-sixth of covenanted posts to be filled by Indians of "high families" via nomination rather than exam. However, this was seen as an inferior tier and was eventually abolished because it failed to satisfy the demands of the rising Indian middle class Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, p.515.

Sources: History , class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Effects of British Rule, p.269; Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT], Administrative Organisation and Social and Cultural Policy, p.108; Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM., Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.515; Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill., Historical Background, p.4

5. Constitutional Milestones: Regulating and Charter Acts (intermediate)

To understand the British administrative reforms, we must first look at why the British Parliament felt the need to intervene in the affairs of a private trading entity—the East India Company (EIC). Initially, the EIC was just a merchant body, but as it acquired vast territories, corruption grew and the company faced a financial crisis. This led to the Regulating Act of 1773, which was the first step taken by the British Government to control and regulate the affairs of the EIC in India. It recognized that the Company's role extended beyond trade into administrative and political realms Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.502.

One of the most significant changes was the structural reorganization of leadership. The Act designated the Governor of Bengal as the 'Governor-General of Bengal' and created an Executive Council of four members to assist him. Lord Warren Hastings became the first such Governor-General. Crucially, the Governors of Bombay and Madras were made subordinate to him, centralizing power for the first time. To ensure judicial oversight, the Act provided for the establishment of a Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William (Calcutta) in 1774, consisting of a Chief Justice and three other judges M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Historical Background, p.1.

As the British empire expanded, the administration became more sophisticated through the Charter Acts. The Charter Act of 1833 was the final step towards centralization in British India. It renamed the Governor-General of Bengal as the 'Governor-General of India' and vested in him all civil and military powers. Lord William Bentinck was the first to hold this title History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board), Effects of British Rule, p.265. This Act also ended the Company's activities as a commercial body, making it a purely administrative body and introduced the concept of a Law Member in the council to codify Indian laws.

Finally, the Charter Act of 1853 marked a significant constitutional landmark by separating, for the first time, the legislative and executive functions of the Governor-General’s council. It added six new members called legislative councillors to the council, essentially creating a 'Mini-Parliament'. Furthermore, it threw open the Civil Services to a system of open competition, ending the patronage of the Court of Directors Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.506.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Rajiv Ahir, SPECTRUM), Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.502, 506; Indian Polity (M. Laxmikanth), Historical Background, p.1; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Effects of British Rule, p.265

6. Police Reforms and Codification of Laws (exam-level)

To understand the British administrative machinery, we must look at the Police and the Judiciary as the twin pillars of 'Law and Order'. Before the British, internal security was a decentralized affair, largely managed by Zamindars and village watchmen. However, as the East India Company's territories expanded, they needed a professional, centralized force to protect their commercial interests and maintain social control.

Lord Cornwallis is recognized as the creator of the modern police system in India. In 1791, he fundamentally altered the landscape by relieving Zamindars of their traditional police duties and establishing a regular, salaried police force. He divided districts into Thanas (circles), each headed by an Indian officer called a Daroga. At the district level, the entire organization was supervised by a British Superintendent of Police (SP). While this modernized the system, it's important to note that Indians were strictly excluded from the higher ranks, reflecting the racial hierarchy of the era Bipin Chandra, Modern India (NCERT), Administrative Organisation, p.111.

Parallel to police reforms was the urgent need for a uniform legal system. Initially, the British struggled with a complex web of local customs, Hindu laws, and Muslim laws. The first major step toward formalizing the judiciary was the Regulating Act of 1773, which led to the establishment of the Supreme Court at Fort William (Calcutta) in 1774, with Sir Elijah Impey as its first Chief Justice. Later, the Charter Act of 1833 paved the way for the First Law Commission in 1834. Chaired by Thomas Babington Macaulay, this commission was tasked with the 'Codification of Laws' to ensure legal clarity across the subcontinent. This effort eventually culminated in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which was enacted in 1860 and became operational in 1862 Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Constitutional and Judicial Developments, p.518.

Feature	Pre-Cornwallis System	Cornwallis Police System (1791)
Responsibility	Local Zamindars and Faujdars	Professional Police Force
Unit of Administration	Land holdings/Villages	Thanas (Circles)
Local Head	Zamindar's men	Daroga (an Indian official)
District Head	None centralized	Superintendent of Police (SP)

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Constitutional, Administrative and Judicial Developments, p.518; Modern India (Old NCERT), Administrative Organisation and Social and Cultural Policy, p.110-111

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the timeline of British Administrative Reforms, this question serves as a perfect test of your ability to distinguish between incremental steps and institutionalization. In your recent study of the Judicial and Police evolution, we examined how the British shifted from mere revenue collectors to structured administrators. This question specifically targets your memory of "Who did What" by testing three distinct pillars: the Police system, the Judiciary, and the Legal Code. As outlined in A Brief History of Modern India by Rajiv Ahir, these developments were part of a larger effort to centralize power and standardize law across the presidency.

Let’s walk through the reasoning as if we were in the exam hall. Statement 1 is the classic UPSC swap trap. While Warren Hastings did introduce basic reforms to the faujdari system, it was Lord Cornwallis who actually established a regular police force on the British pattern in 1791 by creating thanas and the office of the Daroga. Because Statement 1 is factually inaccurate, you can immediately eliminate options A, C, and D. Statement 2 is a foundational fact from the Regulating Act of 1773, which led to the creation of the Supreme Court at Calcutta in 1774. Statement 3 requires you to recall the work of the First Law Commission; although the IPC was drafted in the 1830s under Macaulay, it was indeed enacted in 1860, making both statements 2 and 3 correct.

To arrive at the correct answer, (B) 2 and 3, you must learn to spot the nuance of attribution. UPSC often attributes the work of one Governor-General to another (like swapping Hastings with Cornwallis) or confuses the drafting date of a law with its enactment date. By identifying the Cornwallis-Police link as the primary "building block," you can confidently bypass the distractors and confirm that the judicial and legal milestones mentioned in the other statements are historically sound as per Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth.