The Pandyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c19.25.2

c19.25.2

he said that he had been ruined by the confiscation of his father’s property, himself having been no party to the murder, and that he would pay 800 gold coins to the temple treasury in lieu of the confiscated property. His plea was accepted and his father’s lands, houses, gardens and servants both male and female were restored to him subject only to the additional condition that he should maintain a service (śandi) in the temple. We also learn that, in the interval, the property of another person had been confiscated, but afterwards, most of it was restored, probably because he was able to establish his innocence. Some points come out clearly in this case and these are worth noting. Justice is administered in a rough and ready manner by the local authorities of the village. A criminal who is notoriously guilty of a serious offence, in this case the murder of a Brahmin, and escapes punishment, not only forfeits his property, but becomes more or less an outlaw who may be killed with impunity by anybody. The property that is forfeited under such conditions enriches the temple, and neither the king nor the villagers seem to touch it, probably in literal fulfilment of the injunction of Manu in the matter (ix. 243). When the murderer has paid for his offence with his life, the bulk of his property is restored to his heir, double punishment for the same offence being avoided, so to say.