Judicial Administration in Ancient India - Informative & researched article on Judicial Administration in Ancient India
 Indianetzone: Largest Free Encyclopedia of India with thousand of articlesIndian Administration

 Art & Culture|Entertainment|Health|Reference|Sports|Society|Travel
Forum  | Free E-magazine  | RSS Feeds  
History of India|Indian Temples|Indian Museums|Indian Literature|Geography of India|Flora & Fauna|Indian Purans|Indian Philosophy|Indian Administration|Indian Languages|Education
Home > Reference > Indian Administration > History of Indian Administrative System > Judicial Administration in Ancient India
Judicial Administration in Ancient India
Judicial Administration did not form a part of the duties of the state in ancient India.
 Judicial Administration in Ancient IndiaAdministration of justice was not under the state purview. Vedic literature nowhere refers to the king as a judge either in civil or crimina1 cases. Crimes like murder, theft and adultery have been mentioned however there is no indication as to whether they were tried or not. It is considered that sabhapati of the later Vedic period may have been a judge. According to Dharma sastrasand Arthashastrathere has been a well developed judiciary. The king was considered as the fountain of justice. He had to attend court in order to decide disputes. Punishing the offenders was considered as his sacred duty. The thief was to approach the king with a crusher in his hand and confess his offence. If the king did not take the pestle from the hand of the thief and dash his brains as a punishment, it would be considered as neglect of duty.

As per Dharmashastra and Nitishastra the King should spend around a couple of hours in adjudication. The king would look into important cases only. At time he would delegate the work to the chief justice. Whether a king decides a case perfectly or not, there is no appeal against this decision. The king was expected to be impartial in deciding the cases. He had to decide as per the law else he would be considered guilty. Law was not passed by a legislature. If the law is religious in nature it was regarded as based upon Srutis and Smritis. If it was a secular law it was based upon universal validity and authority.

Pradvivaka or the Chief Justice was a legal personality of repute. He had to be learned in substantive law and the legal procedures. He was also a master in sacred and customary laws. The system of jury was the most interesting feature of judicial system. If the king and the chief justice are not assisted by a panel of jurymen, they could not begin a trial case. Judicial Administration in Ancient IndiaThe number of jurors was uneven as it could provide the contingency of a difference of opinion. The jurors were supposed to be impartial and grounded in the law. They are supposed to be exponents of correct legal position. A juror who was silent was condemned. The jurors if necessary should oppose the king's decision. It was their duty to restrain a wilful king going off track thereby giving wrong decisions.

The king is to be guided by the verdict of the jury. In exceptional cases where the jurors were unable to decide then the King needs to give his verdict. According to the Smritis the jurors should be Brahmanas. In order to execute the functions of juror one should have knowledge in sacred law. However regarding the disputes among the cultivators, merchants and foresters knowledge of sacred law is not required.

When kingdoms became extensive subordinate royal courts began to be constituted for important towns and cities. They were often located in the headquarters of territorial divisions, like Sthana, Dronamukha and Kharvatika. These courts functioned under the authority of the royal seal and were called mudrita later. Circuit courts also existed.

Along with official courts there were several popular courts. Disputes regarding the boundaries were to be settled by the village elders.

The Kula court was an informal body that consisted of family elders. The term Sreni denotes the courts of guilds. The Puga court of Yajnavalkya consisted of members belonging to different castes and professions. However they were staying in the same village or town. Puga court was later known as Gota court in Maharashtra. In the state of Karnataka it was known as Dharmasasana.

(Last Updated on : 20/06/2014)
E-mail this Article | Post a Comment
More Articles in History of Indian Administrative System  (26)
Recently Updated Articles in Indian Administration
Election Commission of India
Election Commission of India is an independent constitutional authority. It is responsible for the superintendence, direction and control of preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, elections to Parliament and State Legislatures and elections to the offices of the President and Vice-President of India. OP Rawat has been appointed as Election Commissioner of India
A.P.J. Abdul Kalam
A.P.J Abdul Kalam is a man of letters and was the 11th President of India. He was a scientist by profession and made successful break through in the field of scientific innovations.
All India Services
All India Services are the three civil services of India, comprising of the IAS, IPS, and the IFS. These are the prestigious jobs under Government of India.
Reorganisation of Assam
Reorganisation of Assam was far more a difficult task and violent process than elsewhere at that time because the central government faced explicit, unequivocal secessionist demands from non Hindu tribal groups.
Forum on Indian Administration
Free E-magazine
Subscribe to Free E-Magazine on Reference
Judicial Administration in Ancient India - Informative & researched article on Judicial Administration in Ancient India
Contact Us   |   RSS Feeds
Copyright © 2008 Jupiter Infomedia Ltd. All rights reserved including the right to reproduce the contents in whole or in part in any form or medium without the express written permission of
Jupiter Infomedia Ltd.