Treason Laws

Regulation 20 of 1802: Statute of Treasons under which Indians were attainted for their lives in the Presidency of Madras

This regulation included the following clauses:

1. Persons charged with treason, rebellion, or other offences against the State, could be tried immediately by a Circuit Court, or a special Court convened by the governor.

2. The number of judges and law-officers was variable.

3. The trial would be conducted as per the procedures of the Circuit Courts, except that their sentence was to be reported, before execution, to the Foujdarry Udalut (criminal court), and guided "by special orders."

4. The death or absence of any of the judges or law-officers was not to interrupt proceedings, even if no other judge was appointed.

5. The Foujdarry Udalut would report to and await the governor’s orders.

6. Magistrates were to assist in expediting trials, and bringing offenders to justice.

Regulation VII of 1808

1. The governor had the power to declare Martial Law for any period of time in any territory subject to war or rebellion, and immediately punish hostile rebels.

2. All persons subject to the British Government, either by birth, residence, service in any capacity, and under its protection, who rebel or oppose the authority of the government by force of arms, or conspire with, or open aid and abet the enemies of the British Government shall be subject to immediate trial by Courts Martial.

3. A person convicted by a Court Martial during Martial Law, was liable to immediate execution by hanging. His property and effects was subject to forfeiture by the British Government.

4. The governor was authorized to appoint ordinary courts or any special court instead of Courts Martial.

Brown observes that the law was entirely devoid of every safeguard indispensable to secure impartial justice. The accused had no way of challenging his judges on their competency, qualification, knowledge, prejudice, integrity, or any other ground. There was no provision by which he could to be given a written copy of the charges against him. No competent person was appointed to advise or help him establish his innocence. The judges were not sufficiently conversant with his native language to understand his defence, and depended on the witness of approvers whose hopes of pardon could depend upon the prisoner’s conviction.

He continues, “one can imagine the state of mind of the accused, ignorant of the law and language in which his trial for life was held, and perhaps seeing Europeans for the first time, far from his own country and without the assistance of a friend from his own caste or complexion.” Such was the law against which "mere Ryots, inoffensive villagers, whom nothing but the fear of death for themselves and families led to join the insurrection" were up against.

The Commanding Officer of the province, empowered by the governor to confirm the sentences passed upon the prisoners by the Court Martial, and to carry those sentences into immediate execution, without reference to Madras, was an officer of the Bombay army, just arrived. A stranger both to the people and to the country, he was guided by opinions and reports which reiterated the view that the rebels were “a set of traitorous, treacherous villains, for whom hanging was too good.”

The two judges sent from Tellicherry to Mangalore to try the prisoners other than those tried by Court Martial were told they would be provided with details of the number and names of the prisoners to be tried, their crimes, the depositions against them, and the witnesses by the army officers commanding the province and at Mangalore. They, however, had no information, and could not provide them, and at Mangalore, the judges found no prisoners for trial by the special court.