The Administration of the Sultanate of Dehli c11.34

c11.34

According to the Ḥanafī school of jurisprudence, whose tenets mostly found favour in India, the state was entitled to a fifth of all minerals, provided they were solid, and capable of being melted and bearing an imprint. The Shāfi‘īs maintain that no tax is due on minerals and the Mālikīs hold that zakāt should be paid, even though a year has not elapsed since their extraction. The same principle applied to treasure trove, of which a fifth had to be paid to the state and the rest belonged to the finder, irrespective of his being a Muslim or a dhimmi. If the land did not belong to the finder, then the land owner was entitled to four-fifths of the treasure and the rest went to the state. The state claimed a share only of unstamped bullion or of money minted before the conquest of the area by Muslims.⁵ The argument was that the treasure would have formed part of the spoils of war if it had not been hidden. Sulṭān Sikandar Lodī twice refused to take any portion of treasure trove discovered in his reign; probably the coins bore Islamic legends.¹ This law had its counterpart in the Hindu nīti-shāstras. Kautilya holds that all treasure trove belongs to the king, but Viṣṇu takes a more lenient view and allows a small share to the finder; according to the latter, the Brahmans may keep the whole.² Viṣṇu lays down that a king is entitled to the entire product of mines.³