History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v2.c20.133.3

v2.c20.133.3

he allows a brāhmaṇa to be drowned in water if he is guilty of high treason, or of forcible entry in the king's harem or of inciting the enemies of the king &c. Kātyāyana³¹⁸ (quoted by Viśvarūpa on Yāj. II. 281) prescribes death sentence even for a brāhmaṇa when the latter is guilty of the destruction of a foetus, of theft, of striking a brāhmaṇa woman with a weapon and of killing an innocent woman. The Mit. on Yāj. III. 257 thinks it possible that kings sentenced brāhmaṇas to death in spite of the prohibition of corporal punishment and we have a classical illustration in the death sentence passed on the brāhmaṇa Cārudatta by king Pālaka in the Mṛcchakaṭika (IX). The foregoing discussion shows that the only special privilege claimed for the brāhmaṇa in the law courts of the land was freedom from death sentence or other corporal punishment like whipping, though rarely he was liable to be sentenced to death also. He was subject to the indignities of branding and being paraded on the back of an ass, to fines and banishment. These claims were very moderate as compared with the absurd lengths to which the doctrine of 'benefit of clergy' was carried in England and other western countries.³¹⁹ The clergyman in England was not by birth, he had to be ordained. Yet clergymen claimed that an ordained clerk, a monk or nun charged with serious offences called felonies could be tried only by an ecclesiastical court and this was conceded by the ordinary courts;