LEGAL SYSTEM IN ANCIENT INDIA

1.1LEGAL METHODS

Submitted by-

Gaurangi Sharma

UG17-38

B.A.LLB.(Hons)

Semester-I

2017-2018

Submitted to-

Ms. Karishma B Gavai (Asst. Prof of Law)

MAHARSHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAGPUR

INDEX
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………3

Aim and Objective…………………………………………………………………..5

Research methodology………………………………….…………………………..6

Research Questions…………………………………………………………………7

Types of courts………………………………………………………………….…..8

Kinds of laws………………………………………………………………….……10

Importance of jury………………………………………………………………….12

Administration of justice under various rulers……………………………………...13

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….15

Bibliography………………………………………………………………..………16

2
INTRODUCTION
India has a recorded legal history starting from the Vedic ages. It is believed that ancient India
had some sort of legal system in place even during the Bronze Age and the Indus Valley
civilization. Law as a matter of religious prescriptions and philosophical discourse has an
illustrious history in India. Emanating from the Vedas, the Upanishads and other religious texts,
it was a fertile field enriched by practitioners from different Hindu philosophical schools and
later by the Jains and Buddhists. Secular law in India varied widely from region to region and
from ruler to ruler. Court systems for civil and criminal matters were essential features of many
ruling dynasties of ancient India.1

The ancient Aryan rulers of India were confronted by political, economic, and social problems in
many ways similar to those with which modern British statesmen and social reformers are
struggling, and their solutions of them, according to all the evidence of history, were much more
satisfactory to the people at large than any which modern Europe has found. The freedom and
general happiness attained by the people of Great Britain with the help of parliamentary
institutions and the richest revenues of the world can hardly be compared with that which Indians
within the Aryans enjoyed both before and after the fifth century A.D, the time which we regard
as Dark age. The Indo-Aryan constitution, built up by the highest intelligence of the people upon
the basis of the village communities and not wrung from unwilling war lords and landlords by
century-long struggles and civil wars, secured to the Indian peasant-proprietor not only the
ownership of the land, but very considerable powers of self government. From 300 A.D to 1192
A.D, India is said to be the world’s most developed country, its GDP was equivalent to 25% of

1
https://law-philosophy.knoji.com/analyzing-the-importance-of-ancient-sources-of-law-in-the-indian-legal-

system/Manusmriti

3
world’s GDP, followed by China which had 15% share in World GDP. This tremendous
development was impossible without sound justice dispensing system during that Golden age. To
the contrary some historians and foreign jurists opined that there was ‘no rule of law’ in ancient
India.

Administration of justice was not a part of the state’s duties in early times. We do not find
references to any judicial organizations in Vedic literature. People used to solve their quarrel
among themselves and there was no legal authority to look after the cases that arised. Later
justice was administered by the tribe and clan assemblies and the judicial procedure was very
simple. But with the extension of the functions of the state and the growth of the royal powers,
the king gradually came to be regarded as the origin of justice and a more or less elaborate
system of judicial administration came into existence. Manusmriti and the Arthashastra provide
us information about the well-developed judiciary. According to these literatures the king was
the fountain head of all justice and he was required to spend every day about a couple of hours in
adjudication.2

The paramount duty of the king was the protection of his subjects which involved the
punishment of the wrongdoer. The law to be administered was the Dharma Shastras subject to
local and other usages which were not consistent with the shastras.

2
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/the-legal-system-in-ancient-india-1391-1.html

4
AIM AND OBJECTIVE

The legal system of ancient India has, to an extent, influenced the current justice delivery system.
The aim of this project is to find out how justice was administered during the reign of different
royalties and to study various texts from literatures like Manusmriti and Arthashastra which
describe the judiciary administration during ancient period. Although there have been several
changes in the justice delivery system since then, but the legal system practiced in ancient India
holds a peculiar position since this study will represent the roots of the legal system followed
today.

The basic objective of this project, is thus, to study the functioning of legal system in ancient
period and to find how the current day legal system is different or same as compared to that of
earlier times.

5
RESESRCH METHODOLOGY

The method of research that was followed for the completion of the project was doctrinal method
of research. Legal system of ancient India is well described in Arthashastra and Manusmtiti by
Kautilya. These resources provide a better understanding of the legal system that was prevalent
in earlier times and the judicial processes that were followed accordingly are discussed in this
project in the same manner as described in the above mentioned literatures.

6
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What was the justice delivery system in ancient India?

2. How did the courts function in the ancient times?
3. What were the different kinds of laws and law suits in earlier times?
4. How did jury play an important role in the ancient legal system?

7
TYPES OF COURTS

According to Bhrighu there were fifteen kinds of courts. Some of the prominent courts where
justice was delivered were-

1. The Kings Court: At the head of the judicial system stood the kings court at the capital
and presided by the king himself. But more often a learned Brahmana was appointed for
the purpose and he was known as Adhyaksha or Sabhapathi. Earlier the Adhyaksha was
selected for each particular occasion and in course of time became a permanent officer of
state and held the position of the Chief Justice (Pradvivaka). Apart from the king, this
court consisted of the Pradvivaka and three or four jurors.

2. Court presided by the Chief Justice: The court presided by the chief justice appointed
by the king called Pradvivaka was the second type of court.

3. Principal Courts: Another courts of importance were the principal courts in large town
where royal officers assisted by learned person administered justice. They were presided
by Adhyakshas appointed by the central government.

4. Popular Courts: One special feature of ancient Indian judicial system is the existence of
popular courts. Yajnavalkya refers to three types of popular courts.

 Kula– The Kula has been defined by the Mitakshara as consisting of a group of relations,
near or distant. The Kula or joint families were often very extensive in ancient India. If
there was a quarrel between two members the elders used to attempt to settle it. The Kula
court was this informal body of family elders.

8
  Sreni– When the effort at family arbitration failed, the matter was taken to Sreni court.
The term Sreni was used to denote the courts of guilds which became a prominent feature
of the commercial life in ancient India from 500 B.C. Sreni had their own executive
committees of four or five members and it is likely that they might have functioned as the
Sreni court also for settling the disputes among their members. This was an assembly of
persons following a particular profession like betel sellers, weavers, shoe makers and
such like.

 Puga– This was an association of persons drawn from various castes and following
different professions but staying in the same village or town. The Sabha or the village
assembly of the Vedic period and Gramavriddha court of the Arthasastra were the
forerunner of the Puga court.3

Though these courts were essentially non-official and popular, they had the royal authority
behind them. The government refused to entertain any suits except in appeals against their
decision. It also gave effect to their decrees.

3
Manusmriti: Dharmasya Yonih

9
DIFFERENT KINDS OF LAWS

Justice was administered in accordance with rules which fell under one or other of the following
four heads, namely

 Sacred law (Dharma)

 Secular law (Vyavahara)

 Customs (Charitra)

 Royal commands (Rajasasana)4

Dharmashastra constituted the sacred law and secular law depending upon evidence. Custom was
decided by the opinion of the people and royal edicts constituted the administrative law. Of the
divisions of laws, Manu and almost all law-givers consider customs as the essential principle in
the administration of justice and say that disputes should be decided according to the customs of
countries and districts; of castes; of guilds and of families.

4
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/the-legal-system-in-ancient-india-1391-1.html

10
TYPES OF LAW-SUITS

The topics which give rise to law suits are grouped by the law-givers under 18 titles, namely

 Recovery of debt
 Deposit and pledge
 Sale without ownership
 Concerns among partners
 Resumption of gifts
 Non-payment of wages
 Non-performance of agreements
 Revoking of sale and purchase
 Dispute between owners of cattle and herdsmen
 Dispute regarding boundaries
 Assault
 Defamation
 Theft
 Robbery and violence
 Adultery
 Duties of man and wife
 Inheritance and partition and
 Gambling and betting5

The list includes both civil and criminal cases.

5
https://ilchslcu.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/introduction-to-ancient-indian-laws/

11
IMPORTANCE OF JURY

Jury played a very important role in the ancient legal system. It consisted of odd number of
members. There could be 3 or 5 or 7 members who could form the jury. This was done in order
to reach a definite conclusion each time. The jurists had to be fearless in their opinions and had
to determine the punishment to be awarded to the culprit. A juror keeping silence was
condemned. They were to express their opinion even if it was in opposition to that of the king.
They were to restrain a king going astray or giving a wrong decision. A number of famous jurists
maintained that the king or judge had to be guided by the verdict of the jury and only when the
jurors could not come to a definite decision, the king exercised his privilege to decide the case
according to his own view. These sabhyas were usually Brahmins as they were well versed in
Dharmashastras. However knowledge of sacred law was not necessary when the case (the party
to the dispute) concerned the disputes among the cultivators, merchants and forest dwellers.
Dharmashastra writers themselves recommended that the cases should be tried with the help of
the jurors selected from the castes or the professions of the parties themselves.

Pleaders rarely figure in ancient Indian judicial system. Sukra refers to the practice of appointing
recognized agents in the law courts to defend a case when a party was himself unable to do so
owing to his preoccupation or ignorance of the law. Such agents were known as Niyogins and
they were expected to guard the interests of their parties very carefully. Their fee varied from six
to half percent, according to the value of the property. If they colluded with the other party they
were punished by the state.

The judges and counselors guiding the king during the trial of a case were required to be
independent and fearless and prevent him from committing any error or injustice. Says
Katyayana: "If the king wants to inflict upon the litigants (vivadinam) an illegal or unrighteous
decision, it is the duty of the judge (samya) to warn the king and prevent him. The judge guiding
the king must give his opinion which he considers to be according to law, if the king does not
listen, the judge at least has done his duty. When the judge realizes that the king has deviated

12
from equity and justice, his duty is not to please the king for this is no occasion for soft speech
(vaktavyam tat priyam natra); if the judge fails in his duty, he is guilty.”6

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE UNDER VARIOUS RULERS

Administration of Justice during Gupta times: The king was considered to be the incarnation
of justice and so justice was often administered by the sovereign himself. There was also a high
official called Mahadandanayaka who probably performed the combined duties of the Great
Judge and General. Another official closely associated with him must have been the
Mahaksapatalika or the Great Keeper of Records. In villages justice was administered by royal
officials with the help of the members of the village council or assembly. In addition to official
courts at the headquarters of districts and provinces there existed a number of popular special
courts of self-governing corporations or guilds which decided disputes arising among their
members. The criminal laws during the Gupta rule were not as severe as it was in the time of the
Mauryas. They were mild and most of the crimes were punished only by fines varying in
amounts according to the gravity of the offence. Capital punishment was unknown and the
highest punishment for repeated rebellions was mutilation. Still law and order were well
preserved and the Chinese traveller, Fa-Hien toured all over India without molestation.

Administration of Justice during Harsha times: The Chief Judge during Harsha’s time was
known as Mahpramatara and the Record Keeper as the Mahaksapataladhikaranadhikrita. Judicial
officers were called Nyayakarnika. Compared to the Gupta period, the criminal code during
Harsha’s time was very severe. For violation of the statute, law and conspiracy against the king,
the offender was imprisoned for life and was socially ostracized. For breach of social mobility
and filial duty, the penalty was mutilation of limbs or exile. For minor ordinary offences the
penalty was payment of money. In spite of this severity in the administration of justice, highways
were infested with robber gangs and the Chinese traveller Hiuen-Tsang himself fell a victim to
them.

6
Manusmriti texts

13
Administration of Justice under various other rulers: In the regions ruled by the Chalukyas
of Badami and Pallavas of Kanchi, the king was the fountainhead of justice and the final court of
appeal. In villages and rural tracts the village courts decided the disputes. During the Rashtrakuta
rule the king’s court did not entertain any cases at the first instance and only when the parties felt
dissatisfied with the decision of the village courts, they could appeal to the king or his courts.
There was a Chief Judge who was the final appellate authority for cases coming from the lower
courts, except when the king decided them himself. The records of the Kalyani Chalukyas
mention the office of Dharmadhikari or chief justice. During the times of the Cholas we have
references to dharmasana in several inscriptions, probably signifying the king’s court of justice.
Learned Brahmins known as dharmasana-bhattas assisted the court. The village assemblies
exercised large powers in matters of local interest which they settled with the help of small
committees called Nyayattar or Nyayavattar. All offences- civil or criminal were tried in the first
instance in village courts and in cases of disaffection the matter was taken to the officer of the
king’s government-in-charge of the administration of the nadu. The Chinese writer, Chou-Ju-
Kua mentions about flogging or giving blows to the culprit with a stick after tying him to a
wooden frame for minor offence. It is said that punishments during the Chola period was not all
severe. Even for murder, the punishment meted out to the criminal was the payment of a fine to
the temple. During the time of Rajendra II the assassin of a state official was asked to give 96
sheep towards the maintenance of a perpetual lamp in the temple. Hence it was remarked that the
Chola administration of justice could not be charged with severity or vindictiveness, it may
rather be regarded as swayed by over mercifulness.

14
CONCLUSION

The societies in the beginning were conservative and so were the laws of the societies. Laws
have grown with the growth of society. This establishes a relationship between law and society,
where law is an instrument of social change. To comprehend, understand, and appreciate the
present legal system adequately, it is necessary to acquire a back-ground knowledge of the
course of growth and development of the legal history.

A peculiar feature of the legal development in India was that for long the government
endeavored to create a system of courts without even attempting to develop a body of law.
Conscious efforts to remove these defects were made by developing a coherent body of law. But
the coherent system of law was developed only after the process of codification. Law then
became more territorial and resulted in the application of uniform law throughout the country.
The independence of the judiciary is fairly well assured by the constitution itself and adequate
precautions have been taken to help the judiciary to discharge their functions effectively. Law in
the country is now mostly codified and is uniform throughout the country and the objective is
now to update, reform and bring the law in conformity with the new social conditions prevailing
in the country .In conclusion, we may say that the Indian legal system provides the machinery for
the expansion and preservation of the law since time immemorial.

15
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

There were some resources which were referred to for better understanding and completion of
the project. They are listed below:

Books referred:

Ancient Indian Law : Author- Justice Rama M. Joise,

: Publication house- Universal law publication

: Year- 2015 reprint

: Edition- 1 ED

Websites:

1. http://iilsindia.com/blogs/2015/01/15/judiciary-in-ancient-india/
2. https://ithihas.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/judicial-administration-in-ancient-india/
3. https://ilchslcu.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/introduction-to-ancient-indian-laws/

16