History and Constitution of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh
By Advocate Saumya Singh, High Court of Madhya Pradesh
The judiciary is one of the most important pillars of democracy. It not only ensures justice but also protects the fundamental rights of citizens and maintains the rule of law in society. As an advocate practicing in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, I find it necessary to bring to light the rich legal history of our High Court and how it came into being. This post aims to simplify and explain the historical and constitutional evolution of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in a way that every citizen can understand and appreciate.
1. The Beginning: Judicial Setup in the Central Province (1861)
The origins of the Madhya Pradesh High Court can be traced back to the 19th century during the British era. On 2nd November 1861, the area currently known as Madhya Pradesh was recognized as the Central Province under British administration. During this period, there was no High Court in this territory. Instead, judicial matters were handled by a Judicial Commissioner, and the highest court for the province was the Judicial Commissioner's Court located at Nagpur.
This system was rudimentary, and although it served the basic needs of law and order, it lacked the structure and authority of a full-fledged High Court. Citizens had limited avenues for appeal and justice, especially in civil and constitutional matters.
2. Transformation into Governor’s Province and Demand for a High Court (1921)
A major political and administrative shift took place in 1921 when the Central Province was elevated to a Governor’s Province. According to the then constitutional laws, a Governor’s Province was entitled to have its own High Court. Naturally, this led to demands from the legal fraternity and the general public for the establishment of a High Court in the province.
However, due to financial limitations and administrative challenges, the British Government delayed the creation of the High Court. This denial continued for almost 15 years, even though the need for a proper High Court was growing with the population and legal complexity of the region.
3. The Formation of Central Provinces & Berar (1933) and Establishment of Nagpur High Court (1936)
In the year 1933, the territory of Berar, which was previously part of the Nizam's Hyderabad State, was merged into the Central Province. The newly combined area was called "Central Provinces & Berar". This merger not only increased the geographical size of the state but also raised the legal and administrative responsibilities.
Finally, on 2nd January 1936, justice took a new shape when the Nagpur High Court was established through the Letters Patent issued by King George V under Section 108 of the Government of India Act, 1915. The court was given full judicial powers, and for the first time, citizens of the province had access to a true High Court to hear civil, criminal, and constitutional matters.
4. Post-Independence Continuity of Nagpur High Court (1950)
Even after India achieved independence in 1947, and the Constitution of India came into effect on 26th January 1950, the Nagpur High Court continued to operate under the legal authority provided by the Constitution.
Under Article 225 and Article 372 of the Indian Constitution, the existing judicial system, including the High Courts established before the Constitution, were allowed to continue until Parliament made alternative provisions. This legal continuity ensured that there was no judicial vacuum in the Central Provinces & Berar.
5. States Reorganization and Birth of Madhya Pradesh High Court (1956)
A major reformation took place on 1st November 1956, when the States Reorganization Act, 1956 was enacted by the Indian Parliament. This Act redrew the boundaries of Indian states based on linguistic and administrative convenience.
As per Section 9 of this Act, the new state of Madhya Pradesh was created by merging parts of Madhya Bharat, Vindhya Pradesh, and Bhopal with the existing Central Provinces & Berar. Consequently, under Section 49(1) of the same Act, the Nagpur High Court was officially recognized as the High Court of Madhya Pradesh.
However, a significant change was made — the principal seat of the High Court was shifted from Nagpur to Jabalpur, a centrally located city in the newly reorganized state.
6. Establishment of Benches at Indore and Gwalior
Initially, this relocation created logistical difficulties for people living in the far-west and northern parts of the state. To address this, the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court used his powers under Section 49(3) of the States Reorganization Act and issued an order on 1st November 1956 to create temporary benches at Indore and Gwalior.
These benches operated temporarily for several years to cater to local populations, reduce the burden on the principal seat in Jabalpur, and make justice more accessible. Recognizing their importance, the Government of India issued a Presidential Notification on 28th November 1968 under Section 51(2) of the Act to make these benches permanent.
7. Formation of Chhattisgarh and Separation of High Court (2000)
The next major judicial change came with the formation of the state of Chhattisgarh on 1st November 2000 under the Madhya Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2000. This new state was carved out of eastern Madhya Pradesh, which included districts like Bilaspur, Raipur, and Bastar.
With the birth of Chhattisgarh, a separate High Court was established at Bilaspur for the new state. The High Court at Jabalpur continued to function as the High Court of the now-smaller Madhya Pradesh.
8. Conclusion: A Legacy of Legal Service
From a single Judicial Commissioner in Nagpur to a fully functional High Court with three benches in Jabalpur, Indore, and Gwalior, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has come a long way. It has not only adapted to administrative changes but has also evolved with the times to ensure that justice remains accessible to every corner of the state.
As a practicing advocate, I feel proud to be part of this institution that carries a deep legacy and a constitutional responsibility to uphold justice, liberty, and equality.
