Md.

Meftahul Hasan
Lecturer
Department of Law
Jagannath University

meftahul@law.jnu.ac.bd
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
Administration of Justice
 In ancient India, the King was regarded as the
fountain-head of justice. His foremost duty was to
protect his subjects. He was respected as the lord of
dharma and was entrusted with the supreme authority
of the administration of justice in his Kingdom.
During the Hindu period different courts were
established and procedures had been followed to
administer justice.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
 Constitution of Courts
A. The King’s Court: The King's court was the highest
court of appeal in the state. It was also a court of
original jurisdiction for cases of vital importance to the
state. In the King's Court the King was advised by
learned Brahmins, Chief Justice and other judges,
ministers, elders and representatives of the trading
community.
B. The Court of the Chief Justice: The Court of Chief
Justice was the second highest Court in the Kingdom
presided by Chief Justice who
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
was called Pradvivaka. A board of judges assisted
Chief Justice. All the judges in the board belonged to
three upper castes preferably Brahmins.
C. Special Tribunals: Sometimes separate tribunals
with specified territorial jurisdiction used to be formed
with among the judges who were members of the board
of the Court of Chief Justice.
D. Town or District Courts: In towns and districts
courts were run by the government officials to
administer justice under authority of the King.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
E. Village Councils: In villages there were local
village councils named kulani which was a similar
concept to modern Panchayats. It consisted of a board
of five or more members to dispense justice to
villagers. Village councils dealt with simple civil and
criminal cases. It was concerned with all matters
relating to endowments, irrigation, cultivable land,
punishment of crime etc. In each village, a local
headman was liable to maintain order and to administer
justice. The headman was also a member of the village
council.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
F. Family Courts: Family courts were also established
to decide civil disputes amongst family members.
These family courts, though not like today, were made
up of groups of families in the same village.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
 Judicial Procedure
A. Stages of a Suit:
A suit or trial consisted of four stages:
i) the plaint (poor-va-paksha),
ii) the reply (uttar),
iii) the trial and investigation (kriyaa), and
iv) finally the verdict or decision (nirnaya).
B. Trial conducted by Bench of more than one
Judges:
One of the cardinal rules of the administration of
justice in ancient India was that justice
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
should not be administered by a single judge. Generally
a bench of two or more judges would administer
justice. Even the King decided cases in his council.
C. Appointment of Judges and Judicial standard:
In the appointment of the Chief Justice and other judges
the question of caste consideration played a vital role.
The principal considerations were:
 The chief Justice and other judges must be appointed
preferably from Brahmins, then in
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
order of preference from Kshatriyas and Vaisyas.
 A Sudra was forbidden to be appointed as a judge.
 Appointments were made from among the persons
who were highly qualified and learned in law.
 Judges had to possess high integrity. Non-believers,
insane and distressed persons were not considered to
be appointed as judges.
 Women were not allowed to hold office of a
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
judge.
 Judges were required to take the oath of impartiality
when deciding disputes between citizens.
D. Position of Lawyers:
The organization of the lawyers as it exists today was
not in existence in the ancient Hindu period. But
sometimes a very high level of technicalities and skilled
help had been required in litigation. In that
circumstance, persons well-versed in the law of the
Smritis and the procedure of the courts were
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
appointed to represent a party and place his case before
the court.
E. Rules of Evidence:
During the course of proceedings of a trial both parties
were required to prove their case by producing
evidence. Ordinarily, evidence was based on any or all
the three sources, namely, documents, witnesses and the
possession of incriminating objects. In criminal cases,
sometimes circumstantial evidence was sufficient to
punish the criminal or to acquit him.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
F. Witnesses:
The accused was allowed to produce any witness in his
defence before the court to prove his innocence.
Witnesses were required to take an oath before the
court. In civil cases, the social status and qualification
of the witness was always enquired by the court. False
witnesses were very severely fined by the courts.
G. Trial by Jury:
The jury system was existed in ancient India but not in
the same form as understood in
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
today's world. There is evidence that the members of
the community assisted the court in the administration
of justice.
H. Trial by Ordeal:
Ordeal, which was a kind of custom based on religion
and faith in God, was a means of proof to determine the
guilt of a person. This system was very painful and
dangerous to the accused, and sometimes the person
giving ordeal died due to prove his innocence. The
application of trial by ordeal was limited only to the
cases where any concrete evidence
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
on either side was not available. Some important
ordeals, which were commonly adopted, may be stated
as follows:
(i) Ordeal of balance
(ii) Ordeal by fire
(iii) Ordeal by water
(iv) Ordeal by poison
(v) Ordeal of lot
(vi) Ordeal by rice grains
(vii) Ordeal of fountain-cheese etc.
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
I. Crimes and Punishments:
The philosophy of crime and punishment was based on
the idea that the punishment removes impurities from
the accused person and his character is reformed.
Before punishment was to be awarded the judge had to
consider the motive and nature of the offence, time and
place, strength, age, conduct, learning and monetary
position of the offender.
Methods of Punishments: There were four methods of
punishments:
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
i. by gentle admonition,
ii. by severe reproof,
iii. by fine and
iv. by corporal punishment.
These punishments could be inflicted separately or
together depending upon the nature of the offence.
Judges always considered the relevant circumstances
before deciding actual punishment.
Special Considerations:
 The severity of punishment depended on
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
caste as well. Certain classes of persons were exempted
from punishment. Old people over eighty, boys below
sixteen, women and persons suffering from diseases
were to be given half of the normal punishment.
 A child below five was considered to be immune
from committing any crime and therefore was not
liable to be punished.
 In adultery and rape, punishment was awarded on the
basis of the caste considerations of the offender and
of the
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
woman.
 In abuse or contempt case every care was taken to see
that each higher caste got due respect from persons of
lower caste. For example, if a person of a lower caste
sat with a person of higher caste, the man of the lower
caste was to be branded on the breech.
 For committing murder the murderer was to pay 1000
cows for killing a Kshatriya, 100 for a Vaisya and 10
for a Sudra. These cows were given to the King to be
delivered to
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
the relatives of the murdered person. A bull was given
to the King as a fine for murder.
 If a Brahmin was killed by a person of a lower caste,
the murderer would be put to death and his property
confiscated. If a Brahmin was killed by another
Brahmin he was to be branded and banished. If a
Brahmin killed a person from lower caste, he was to
compound for the offence by fine.
 For plotting against the King, forcibly entering into
the harem of the King, aiding the King's enemy,
creating revolt in the
 Hindu Period (Cont.)
army, murdering ones father or mother or committing
serious arson, capital punishment was given in varied
forms, namely, roasting alive, drowning, trampling by
elephants, devouring by dogs, cutting into pieces,
impalement etc.
The above discussion on crime and punishment gives a
necessary idea that infliction of punishment was not
based on any broad principle rather on whim and caste
consideration which was completely devoid of any
humanity and ethics.