Hindu Administrative Institutions c10.s3.50

c10.s3.50

The chapter on ‘*Śuddhacitraśca daṇḍakalpaḥ*’² is both interesting and instructive from more than one point of view. It shows the nature of capital punishments in practice in the fourth century B.C. in India, and the principle on which such punishments were inflicted. The criminals are divided into two classes, according to the *Kauṭalīya*—those who are cruel in their offences, and those who are not cruel. Death penalty without torture to the latter and with torture to the former is recommended. Even in this ruling the *Kauṭalīya* takes care to mention that it is supported by the *śāstras*.³ But death was not always the penalty. Fines and compensation price were the penalty, if the person, wounded in an affray or riot, should die after a fortnight and beyond. Hurting a person with wounds and causing abortion by violence were also attended with fines. For treasonous offences, parricide and such other capital offences, death was the penalty with torture. The person who was guilty of poisoning is drowned if male, and was put to death tortured by bulls, if female. There are several other offences mentioned.⁴