In 1832, certain modifications were introduced by law (Regn. VI. of that year), which declared that the futwa might be dispensed with either by referring the case for report to a [punchayet] (q.v.), which sat apart from the Court; or by constituting assessors in the trial (generally three in number). The frequent adoption of the latter alternative rendered the appearance of the Law-officer and his futwa much less universal as time went on. The post of Law-officer was indeed not actually abolished till 1864. But it would appear from enquiry that I have made, among friends of old standing in the Civil Service, that for some years before the issue of the Penal Code and the other reforms already mentioned, the [Moolvee] (maulavī) or Mahommedan Law-officer had, in some at least of the Bengal districts, practically ceased to sit with the judge, even in cases where no assessors were summoned.[[152]] I cannot trace any legislative authority for this, nor any Circular of the Sudder Nizamut; and it is not easy, at this time of day, to obtain much personal testimony. But Sir George Yule (who was Judge of Rungpore and Bogra about 1855-56) writes thus:
"The Moulvee-ship ... must have been abolished before I became a judge (I think), which was 2 or 3 years before the Mutiny; for I have no recollection of ever sitting with a Moulvee, and I had a great number of heavy criminal cases to try in Rungpore and Bogra. Assessors were substituted for the Moulvee in some cases, but I have no recollection of employing these either."
Mr. Seton-Karr, again, who was Civil and Sessions Judge of Jessore (1857-1860), writes:
"I am quite certain of my own practice ... and I made deliberate choice of native assessors, whenever the law required me to have such functionaries. I determined never to sit with a Maulavi, as, even before the Penal Code was passed, and came into operation, I wished to get rid of [futwas] and differences of opinion."
The office of Law-officer was formally abolished by Act XI. of 1864.
In respect of civil litigation, it had been especially laid down (Regn. of April 11, 1780, quoted below) that in suits regarding successions, inheritance, marriage, caste, and all religious usages and institutions, the Mahommedan laws with respect to Mahommedans, and the Hindū laws with respect to Hindūs, were to be considered as the general rules by which the judges were to form their decisions. In the respective cases, it was laid down, the Mahommedan and Hindū law-officers of the court were to attend and expound the law.
In this note I have dealt only with the Mahommedan law-officer, whose presence and co-operation was so long (it has been seen) essential in a criminal trial. In civil cases he did not sit with the judge (at least in memory of man now living), but the judge could and did, in case of need, refer to him on any point of Mahommedan Law. The Hindū law-officer ([Pundit]) is found in the legislation of 1793, and is distinctly traceable in the Regulations down at least to 1821. In fact he is named in the Act XI. of 1864 (see quotation under [CAZEE]) abolishing Law-officers. But in many of the districts it would seem that he had very long before 1860 practically ceased to exist, under what circumstances exactly I have failed to discover. He had nothing to do with criminal justice, and the occasions for reference to him were presumably not frequent enough to justify his maintenance in every district. A Pundit continued to be attached to the Sudder Dewanny, and to him questions were referred by the District Courts when requisite. Neither Pundit nor Moolvee is attached to the High Court, but native judges sit on its Bench. It need only be added that under Regulation III. of 1821, a magistrate was authorized to refer for trial to the Law-officer of his district a variety of complaints and charges of a trivial character. The designation of the Law-officer was Maulavi. (See [ADAWLUT], [CAZEE], [FUTWA], [MOOLVEE], [MUFTY].)
1780.—"That in all suits regarding inheritance, marriage, and caste, and other religious usages or institutions, the laws of the Koran with respect to Mahommedans, and those of the Shaster with respect to Gentoos, shall be invariably adhered to. On all such occasions the Molavies or Brahmins shall respectively attend to expound the law; and they shall sign the report and assist in passing the decree."—Regulation passed by the G.-G. and Council, April 11, 1780.
1793.—"II. The Law Officers of the Sudder Dewanny Adawlut, the Nizamut Adawlut, the provincial Courts of Appeal, the courts of circuit, and the zillah and city courts ... shall not be removed but for incapacity or misconduct...."—Reg. XII. of 1793.
In §§ iv., v., vi. Cauzy and Mufty are substituted for Law-Officer, but referring to the same persons.