Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Administrative System of the Marathas c19.s11: 24. Mutilation—a punishment

Administrative System of the Marathas c19.s11

Language
English

24. Mutilation—a punishment

c19.s11.1

We have seen that capital punishment was not inflicted even for murder during the administration of Shahu Chhatrapati and Balaji Baji Rao. But the two Madhava Raos not only condemned offenders convicted of treason, murder, causing grievous hurt, dacoity and theft, to death, but sometimes caused them to be mutilated. Robbers and thieves were mercilessly deprived of their hands and feet. Here, of course, we find the revival of the old principle of removing the offending limb recommended to the Hindu kings by the compiler of Manu's code, in bygone days of antiquity. Among the papers of the second Madhava Rao have been preserved long lists of convicts condemned to lose their hands and feet.

c19.s11.2

one of these lists enumerates the following sentences for theft:

c19.s11.3

| Capital punishment | ... | 20 men. |
| Right hand and left leg to be cut off | ... | ... | 13 " |
| Right hand only to be cut off | ... | 18 " |
| Right hand and one ear to be cut off | ... | ... | 4 " |
| Right hand and right leg to be cut off | ... | ... | 1 man. |
| One ear to be cut off | ... | 1 " |

c19.s11.4

and one man was to be first paraded ludicrously dressed and then nailed to death.⁵⁷

c19.s11.5

⁵⁷ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 96-99.

c19.s11.6

These punishments were undoubtedly cruel, but it should not be forgotten that humanitarian principles had very little influence on the criminal laws in India as well as in England in the first decade of the 19th century. These inhuman penalties therefore were perhaps less shocking to the people of the time than to us. Even in the native country of Peel and Mackintosh the criminal law was hardly humane. For, while the thief in the Maratha country escaped with the loss of a hand or a foot, his English cousin forfeited his life for the same offence. Capital punishment was prescribed by English law for offences which the Maratha judge would punish with imprisonment only. To the natural severity of English criminal laws was added the influence of the rich. Sir Spencer Walpole says,—"The least influential member of Parliament had sufficient power to have any offence made a capital felony, without benefit of clergy. In 1815 it was capital offence to steal goods to the value of 5s. in a shop. It was capital offence to steal 40s. from a dwelling house. It was capital offence to break frames. It was made a capital offence in 1816 to destroy machines. It was a capital offence to steal a horse or sheep. Up to 1808 it had been a capital offence to pick a man's pocket. Up to 1812 it had been a capital offence for soldiers and mariners to beg. It was seriously proposed in 1813 to punish the fraudulent debtors with death." "There are no less than two hundred felonies," said Mackintosh in 1819, punishable with death." The result was that although "more people were hanged in England than in all Europe besides," crime went on increasing. When this was the state of things in England, it is no wonder that in India mutilation should be inflicted on convicted criminals by Indian and English rulers alike. According to Busteed, mutilation was executed on criminals in Bengal under the orders of the British Government.⁵⁸ Elphinstone found the Maratha country peculiarly free from crimes. The reason was that the rulers were not naturally cruel. They would make every consideration for a deserving offender. Even treason was sometimes pardoned or slightly punished. Some of Sumer Singh's (murderer of Narayan Rao Peshwa) accomplices were let off with a small fine. This want of vindictiveness on the part of the Peshwa's government, and absence of hard and fast criminal laws, enabled the judicial officers to be lenient, and so when an exemplary sentence was passed to overawe would-be offenders, it never failed to strike terror.

c19.s11.7

⁵⁸ Echoes from old Calcutta, pp. 116-120.

Linked texts (1)