State and Government in Ancient India c19.s1.16

c19.s1.16

This theory, however, is untenable,. It was the considered and long-established policy of the governments in Ancient India to encourage these popular courts and to enforce their decisions. Though these courts were essentially non-official and pupolar, they had the royal authority behind them. Yājñavalkya describes them as sanctioned by the king.³ The government has been advised to execute their decrees because the state had delegated these powers to them.⁴ In the medieval and Maratha periods of the history of Mahārāṣṭra we come across several cases of kings like Shivaji, Rajaram and Shahu refusing to entertain any cases at the first instance though pressed to do so. Muslim rulers also like king Ibrahim Adil Shah of Bijapur used to do the same, even when one of the parties was a Muslim and complained that there was a prejudice against him on that score.⁵ It will be thus seen that it was the considered policy of the Government that these popular village courts should flourish; it refused to entertain any suits except in appeals against their decisions; it also gave effect to their decrees. When the British rule was established, the new government began to entertain suits at first instance in its courts. It further declined to execute the decres of the village Panchāyats. The latter, therefore, naturally died down.