Hindu Administrative Institutions c10.s2.4

c10.s2.4

We have no direct evidence as to the method of appointing judges. To-day generally three methods are pursued in modern states—election by the legislature, as in Switzerland; popular election as in the individual states of the United States of America, and appointment by the head of the executive as in very many cases. The last method is commonly deemed the most satisfactory one and the little evidence there is on the subject shows that this was also the practice in ancient India. Election by the legislature was out of the question for there was no legislature as such. Popular election was not applicable to the central state machinery though it was known then. People forming different corporate bodies and those living in villages voluntarily appointed some learned elders of the village and the neighbourhood to decide disputes arising among themselves. These were more arbitrators than judges in the real sense of the word. For they decided cases by arbitration. Whatever might have been the method of election to the communal assemblies (this was undoubtedly by popular election), the judges of the royal court or the *sabhā* were invariably appointed by the executive Government who were competent to demand the necessary personal qualities required in a judge and select him for the office.¹