Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
BRIHASPATI HE IS MORE CLOSER TO MANU AS HIS WORK HAS BEEN PROVED TO BE A VATTIKA ON MANU SMRITI. HE ASSIGNS A PREMIER PLACE TO THE CODE OF MANU,YET HE EXPLAINS ,AMPLIFIES AND DOES NOT HESITATE TO MODIFY ITS RULES ON VARIOUS TOPICS WHEREVER FOUND NECESSARY. ABOUT THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS HE SAID THATIN THE FORMER AGES MEN WERE STRICTLY VIRTUOUS AND DEVOID OF MISCHIEVOUS PROPENSITIES.NOW THAT AVARICE AND MALICE HAVE TAKEN POSSESSION OF THEM,JUDICIAL PROCEEDING HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED. HE ADDED TO THE NARAD LIST OF THE NINE MEMBERS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE THE OFFICER OF THE KING AND MAKES IT TEN. SIMILARLY IN PLACE OF NARAD’S RIGHTEOUS OFFICER HE PUTS THE AUTHORISED PERSON(ADHIKRITA) OR THE CHIEF JUDGE (ADHYAKOA).HE ALSO EXPLAINS THE FOR THE FIRST TIME THE FUNCTIONS OF THESE MEMBERS . HE SAID THAT THE KING SHOULD INFLICT PUNISHMENT BASED ON THE DECISION OF THE JUDGE AND THE ASSESSORS.THE NUMERICAL STRENGHT OF THE SABHAYAS IS PUT AT SEVEN,FIVE OR THREE. ELSE WHERE,WITHOUT STATING CLEARLY THE FUNCTIONS,HE ADDS MINISTERS AND THE PUROHOTA TO THE LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE COURT. HE SPOKE OF THE FOUR COURTS ------1.PRATISTHITA: COURTS WHICH SAT IN A TOWN OR AVILLAGE. 2.APRATISTHITA:WHICH HAS NO FIXED SEAT. 3.MUDRITA:ONE FURNISHED WITH THE KING’S SIGNET RING SUPREINTENDED BY THE CHIEF JUDGE. 4.SASITA:DIRECTED BY THE KING HIMSELF. HE WARNS THE KING THAT HE SHOULD NOT MEDDLE WITH DISPUTES OF ASCETICS AND OF PERSONS VERSED IN SOCERYAND WITCHCRAFT WHICH SHOULD BE SETTLED BY PERSONS FAMILIAR WITH THE THREE VEDAS. HE ALSO INTRODUCES THE FIVE GRADES OF COURT . HE STATES THAT KULA,SRENI,GANA AND OTHER PERSONS DULY AUTHORISED BY THE KING SHOULD DECIDE LAW SUITS EXCEPT CASES OF VIOLENT CRIMES. HE FURTHER ADDED THAT THE AUTHORISED PERSON AND THE KING WERE THE LAST RESORT OF PASSING THE SENTENCE TO WHOM ,WOSE CAUSE HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY TRIED MIGHT APPEAL IN SUCCESSION. IF A CAUSE HAD NOT BEEN DULY INVESTIGATED BY THE BY KULA IT COULD BE DECIDED BY SRENI,IF IT HAD NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY SRENI IT COULD BE DECIDED BY THE GANA AND FINALLY BY THE ROYAL JUDGES. HE COOROBORATES WITH NARAD WHEN HE SPOKE OF THE FOUR MODES OF DECISION NAMELY THOSE ACCORDING TO DHARMA,VYAVAHARA,CHARITRA AND RAJAJNA. HE ALSO SPEAKS OF THE DIFFERENT METHODS OF DECIDING A SIUT BY EQUITY,BY OATHS,BY CONFESSION OF THE ACCUSED,BY PROOF,BY INFERENCE AND BY RAJAJNA. HIS CONCERN FOR EVEN-HANDED JUSTICE BECOMES EVIDENT WHEN HE AMPLIFIES RULES RELATING TO DIFFERENT CLASSES OF EVIDENCE AND DESCRIBES THE CHARACTERSTICS OF EACH ONE OF THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME. HE ALSO SPOKE OF THE 12 KINDS OF WITNESSES.GENERALLY RESPECTED,HONOURED,PIOUS, AND RELIABLE PERSONS OF THE SAME CASTE AS THE ACCUSED,WHEN POSSIBLE WERE PREFERRED FOR EVIDENCE.THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF WITNESSES WAS THREE.BUT BRIHASPATI GAVE NINE ,SEVEN,SIX,FIVE,FOUR,AND EVEN TWO PROVIDED THEY ARE LEARNED BRAHAMANS. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT A PLAINT WHICH IS OF SMALLER VALUE SHOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED BY THE KING.THIS PRINCIPLEWAS EMBODIED IN SECTION 95 OF THE IPC. DOCUMENTS AS A PROOF HAD GREATER IMPORTANCE IN LEGAL MATTERS .HE DIVIDED DOCUMENTS INTO THREE GROUPS----ROYAL WRITING,WRITING MADE A PATRICULAR PLACE AN ONE WRITTEN IN OWN’S HAND. A DOCUMENT WHICH HAS NEITHER BEEN SEEN NOR READ OUR OF 30 YEARS LOSES ITS VALIDITY ALTHOUGH THE SUBSCRIBING WITNESSES ARE STILL ALIVE. ORDEALS ARE GENERALLY RESORTED TO WHEN A DOUBT AROSE WITH REGARD TO A DOCUMENT OR STATEMENT OF WITNESS AND WHEN INFERENCE FAILED. BRIHASPATI MADE A IMPORTANT LANDMARK IN THE HISTORY OF HINDU LAW BY CLASSIFYING MANU’S 18 TITLES OF LAW UNDER TWO HEADS CIVIL AND THE CRIMINAL . UNDER CIVIL LAW WERE LISTED TITLES AS MONEYLENDING,DEPOSITS,INVALID GIFTS,CONCERNS OF PARTNERSHIP,NON-PAYMENT OF WAGES,NONPERFORMANCE OF SERVICE,LAND DISPUTES,SALE WITHOUT OWNERSHIP,RECISSION OF SALE AND PURCHASE ,BREACH OF CONTRACT,RELATION BETWWEN HUSBAND AND WIFE,THEFT AND INHERITANCE,GAMBLING ETC. INSULT,VIOLENCE AND CRIMINAL CONNECTION WITH ANOTHER’S WIFE WHICH SPRANG OUT OF INJURY TO OTHERS CAME UNDER CRIMINAL LAW. ACCORING TO HIM ,IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE CREDITOR TO TAKE A VALID PLEDGE BEFORE LENDING MONEY. AS REGARDS TO LAW OF PARTITION AND INHERITANCE ,HE ALLOWS EQUAL SHARE TO BOTH THE FATHER AND SONS IN THE PROPERTY OF THE GRANDFATHER,WHILE THE SON CAN CLAIM THE SHRE IN THE PROPERTY OF HIS FATHER WITH HIS CONSENT ONLY. HE IS FORTHRIGHT CONCERNING THE PENAL LAW. ACCODING TO HIM IF THE ABUSED RETURNS THE ABUSE ,ONE WHO IS STRUCK RETURNS THE BLOW,AND ONE WHO IS ATTACKED KILLS THE ASSAILANT,HE COMMITS NO OFFENCE.ONE WHO IS INJURES HAD TO MEET THE EXPENSES OF CURING THE WOUNDS. IN PRESCRIBING THE PUNISHMENT FOR THEFT OR VIOLENCE,HE IS CONCERNED MORE WITH THE GRAVITY OF THE OFFENCE THAN WITH THE CASTE OF THE OFFENDER. ACCORDING TO BRIHASPATI,A DECISION SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN MERELY RELYING ON THE TEXT OF THE SHASTRAS.WHEN CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER IS DIVORCED FROM REASON AND COMMONSENSE,LOSS OF DHARMA RESULTS.A THIEF IS HELD TO BE NOT A THIEF AND A GOODMAN IS HELD TO BE WICKED ONE IN A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING NOT ARRIVED AT WITH PROPER REASONING.THE SAGE MANDAVYA WAS HELD TO BE THIEF BECAUSE OF THE DECISION BEONG ARRIVED AT WITHOUT PROPER REASONING.