The Colas c25.45

c25.45

The distinction between civil and criminal offences was unknown; there are few instances where we can trace the conception of crime as a public wrong; one of them¹²² is the case of two persons who stole the images, ornaments, etc. belonging to a temple and were punished by the confiscation of all their properties, which were sold publicly, the proceeds being remitted to the king's treasury. This was about a.d. 1222. Speaking generally all offences including those committed by village officials, were tried in the first instance in village courts; in cases of dissatisfaction the matter was taken up to the officer of the king's government in charge of the administration of the *nāḍu*. Seldom, if at all, did an appeal go further than that. There was a great deal of rough natural justice dispensed through extra-judicial channels. The sharp definiteness and uniformity that characterise modern methods of justice were unknown, and in every case, whatever the authority enquiring into a dispute, an effort was made to convince both parties that the standard of ideal justice which would satisfy reasonable men had been attained in the award. The prevalent notions about this standard were no doubt largely influenced by the *Smṛtis*, and by local practice.