History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.208
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.208
- Language
- English
v4.c63.208.1
VII. 2 divides documents into three kinds viz. those written before the king (i. e. by public officers), those bearing the superscription of witnesses and those without witnesses. The first is a document written in a state office by a scribe appointed by the king and bearing the signature of the head or superintendent of the office. This is just like the registration of documents in modern India. Bṛ.⁴³⁷ (q. by V. P. p. 141, V. May. p. 24) divides documents into three sorts viz. royal writing, writing made at a fixed place and that written in one's own hand. Nār. IV. 135 speaks of two kinds viz. one written by the executant himself in his own hand and that written by another; (the first of these is valid) without attesting witnesses, while the second requires to be attested. In the former no writer (lekhaka) nor witnesses are necessary, while in the latter both are necessary. Even now in India no deed concerning even immoveable property is required by law to be attested except mortgages and gifts. The author of the Saṅgraha, the Mit. on Yāj. II. 84 and several others divide documents into *rājakīya* (public) and *jānapada* (private or of the common people). The V. Mayūkha (p. 24) says that *laukika* and *jānapada* are synonyms and jānapada document is of two kinds viz. written by the executant himself in his own hand and that written by another, and that the first may be without attestation of witnesses, but the other must be attested. On Yāj. II. 22 the Mit.
v4.c63.208.2
divides documents into śāsana and cīraka. The first is the same as rājakīya (described in Yāj. I. 318-320) and cīraka is practically the same as jānapada writing. On Yāj. II. 89 the Mit. remarks that a royal deed must be written in correct and elegant language but a document executed by ordinary people is not required to be in correct Sanskrit, but may be written in the local dialect of the parties. Yāj. II. 89 states that a document written by the executant himself in his own hand is authoritative except when it is brought about by force or fraud. Yāj. II. 84-87 prescribe that a document of debt or the like should be written down by mutual agreement, that the creditor's name should be placed first, that it should mention the year, month, half month, *tithi* (day), the names, caste, gotras, the Vedic School, the names of the fathers of the parties, that when the writing is finished the debtor should write at the end that the deed is approved by N. N. (the executant) son of so and so, that an even number (i. e. not less than two) should attest the document, stating their father's names and that they attest as witnesses and the scribe should write at the end that he wrote the document at the request of both parties. If the debtor or any witness cannot write, his signature should be made by another in the presence of all witnesses (Nār. q. by Mit. on Yāj. II. 87 and by Vy. Nir. p. 87 without name). Rājakiya documents are of three kinds (acc. to Bṛ. quoted in V. P. p. 141, V.
v4.c63.208.3
May. p. 24) viz. *śāsana* (a royal grant of land), *jayapatra* (a judgment deciding a law-suit), *prasāda-patra* (a deed showing the king's pleasure at the devoted service or bravery of a person); acc. to Vasiṣṭha (q. in Sm. C. II. p. 55 and V. May. p. 28) it is of four kinds viz. *śāsana*, *jayapatra*, *ājñāpatra* (a royal command addressed to feudatories, high or low officers like the wardens of the marches), *prajñāpanāpatra* (a writing of request addressed by the king to sacrificial priests, a *purohita*, teacher, learned brāhmaṇas or other highly honoured persons); it is five-fold acc. to S. V. pp. 111-113 viz. śāsana, jayapatra, ājñāpatra, prajñāpanāpatra and prasādapatra. Kauṭ. in II. 10 speaks of several kinds of royal orders and names them, such as prajñāpanā (request by a messenger about what another prays), ājñāpatra (as above), *paridāna* (honour to the deserving or gift in distress), *parihāra* (remission of taxes for certain castes or villages by the king), *nisṛṣṭilekha* (writing whereby the king accepts the actions or words of some trustworthy person as his own), *prāvṛttika* (conveying information about some portentous happening or some news about enemies etc.), *pratilekha* (reply in accordance with discussion held with the king on a message from another), *sarvatraga* (order addressed to high functionaries and officers for the welfare of travellers). The contents and form of royal grants have been described in H. of Dh. vol. II pp. 860-861.
v4.c63.208.4
The jānapada writings are divided into various sorts, seven (acc. to Bṛ. q. by Aparārka p. 683, Sm. C. II. p. 60) or eight (acc. to Vyāsa in Sm. C. II. p. 59) and the Sm. C. remarks that there is no emphasis on the number and there may be many more varieties. Bṛ. (S. B. E. vol. 33 p. 305), Kāt. (254-257) and others mention and define the following jānapada writings; *bhāga-* or *vibhāgapatra* (deed of partition), *dānapatra* (deed of gift), *krayapatra* (sale deed), *ādhānapatra* or *ādhipatra* (deed of pledge or mortgage), *sthitipatra* or *saṁvitpatra* (deed of convention, which is made by the inhabitants of a village or city or the members of a corporation or guild by mutual agreement for settling their conventions), *dāsapatra* (deed of bondage to serve executed by a person devoid of food or clothing), *ṛṇalekha* or *uddhārpatra* (bond of debt promising return at a future date with interest), *viśuddhipatra* (deed of purification given to a person with the attestation of witnesses when a penance for a sin has been performed), *sandhipatra* (deed of peace when a compromise in the presence of leading people after a charge of the commission of a crime has been made), *sīmāpatra* (deed of boundary when a dispute about it is settled), *upagata* (a receipt passed by the creditor to a debtor on payment of the whole or part of a debt, Yāj. II. 93), *anvādhipatra* (a sub-mortgage i. e.
v4.c63.208.5
where the mortgagee or pledgee mortgages or pledges the property or thing to another and hands over the former deed to his own creditor). The two branches of private documents (jānapada) are either *ciraka* or not ciraka; ciraka is defined as a document written by hereditary scribes residing in the capital, who are approached by the parties and bearing the signatures of the parties and witnesses and the names of their fathers (Saṅgraha q. by Sm. C. II. p. 59, Par. M. III. p. 127). Vide n. 437 above and Śukra II. 299-318 and IV. 5. 172-177 for definitions of these and other kinds of documents. But acc. to Vyāsa quoted by Sm. C. II. p. 59 private documents are of eight kinds viz. ciraka, upagata (a receipt), svahasta (written by the executant himself), ādhipatra, krayapatra, sthitipatra, sandhipatra, viśuddhipatra. Some works like the Vyavahārasāra (p. 69) and the Mit. write the word as *ciraku* and not *ciraka*. It was so called (viz. *ciraka*) probably because it was written on the back (of the bark of the birch or some other tree). If the proper word is *ciraka* then it was employed because being executed by scribes appointed by the king, it had validity for all time (*cira*) as compared with purely private documents. ‘Ciraka’ in this last sense seems to be equal to ‘sthānakṛta’ of other writers.