Hindu Administrative Institutions c12.s3.24

c12.s3.24

What the smṛtis have ruled, the Arthaśāstras of Kauṭalya, Kāmandaka and Sukra have recommended. According to Sukra,⁴ such of those who are of good character, and who are appointed by special agreement (nibandha) are alone fit for hearing causes and deciding them on their merits. The passages indicate that there were separate forest-courts, merchant-courts, warrior-courts, and village-courts, constituted by the local citizens themselves. These local courts however seem to have extended their powers of jurisdiction later on while the earlier *smṛtis* like that of *Bṛhaspati* refer only to civil causes. Kauṭalya empowers the village headman to take cognizance of both civil and criminal cases. The later South Indian inscriptions (Chola inscriptions) contain passages which testify to the great extent of the criminal jurisdiction exercised by these local courts.