History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.631.3

v4.c63.631.3

But when the debtor admits his liability and yet does not pay and when the creditor therefore employs one of the means (other than a suit) appropriate to the caste and position of the debtor, then, if the debtor complains to the king against the creditor, the debtor would be compelled by the king to pay the debt and a fine for unnecessary complaint (Yāj. II. 40, Manu VIII. 176, Viṣṇu Dh. S. VI 19). Kāt. (580-584) provides that where⁷³⁶ it is the custom of the country, the creditor may hold the debtor in restraint openly before an assembly of people until he pays what is due, that when a man so restrained has an inclination to answer calls of nature, he should be followed behind by the creditor or he should be allowed to go alone but fettered, that he should be allowed to go home for his meals and at night if he furnishes a surety, and that the surety will have to remain in restraint (while the debtor is absent), that if the debtor cannot secure a surety or does not accept the proposal of furnishing one he should be confined in jail or should be kept guarded by men; but that a respectable man who is trust-worthy and pure in conduct should not be put in jail, that he should be allowed to go without fetters or after being bound by an oath. Manu VIII. 177, Yāj. II. 43, Nar. IV.