State and Government in Ancient India c10.s6.5

c10.s6.5

Another school however pronounced the king to be *adaṇḍya* or above punishment.² If he broke the law, the punishment was left to God. In extreme cases extra-constitutional remedies like the rebellion or regicide were suggested ; but they were usually impracticable. Village councils and town corporations often enjoyed almost complete freedom in their local affairs ; the courts, whether royal or popular, usually administerd the traditional law as embodied in the *jātidharama* (caste rules), *śreṇidharma* (guild rules) and *janapadadharma* (local customs). But a wilful king could set all these at nought and rule in a tyrannical way, as is shown by the pages of the *Rājatarangiṇī* dealing with the history of medieval Kashmir. From *c.* 400 A. D. the sovereignty was vested in the king and it was not controlled by constitutional checks of the modern types. Of course it should not be forgotten that most of these checks were evolved in Europe only in the post-Reformation period.