Administrative System of the Marathas c20: Chapter VIII. Social Affairs; Prison and Police

Administrative System of the Marathas c20

Language: English

c20.s1 1. Social Affairs — 4 parts
c20.s2 Jurisdiction over Non-Hindus — 15 parts
c20.s3 5. Influence of Orthodox Views — 14 parts
c20.s4 7. Victims of Violence — 5 parts
c20.s5 8. Informal Marriage — 6 parts
c20.s6 9. Involuntary social Offence — 12 parts
c20.s7 11. Forcible Marriage — 5 parts
c20.s8 12. Prisons — 3 parts
c20.s9 13. Leave for Religious Duties — 4 parts
c20.s10 14. Consideration for the Prisoners Health — 10 parts
c20.s11 15. Treatment of Political Prisoners — 7 parts
c20.s12 16. The Police — 2 parts
c20.s13 17. Criminal Tribes — 32 parts

Chapter VIII. Social Affairs; Prison and Police

c20.2

We have at another place remarked that the Peshwas and the Chhatrapatis before them were not only the secular but also the ecclesiastical head of the state. They united to a certain extent the rights and prerogatives of the Pope and the Emperor. This peculiar position left its mark on the criminal laws of the time. Murder was to them not only a crime but a sin also. And as the crime had its legal punishment, the sin had its religious penance as prescribed by the Shastras. So a murderer even when pardoned had to perform the necessary Shastric penance. During the reign of Shahu Chhatrapati one Shidoji Raut murdered his concubine and cousin. At the intercession of his brother Shetyaji, Shidoji obtained a free pardon, but he was ordered to perform the Prayashchitta for cousin-murder.¹ An Abhayapatra granted to Shetyaji Raut : "Your brother Shidoji had a concubine and his cousin Bakaji induced her to commit adultery. They did not pay any attention to warning given once or twice. Thereupon Shidoji caught his concubine and cousin at the same place in his house and killed them. A written information was sent to the Huzur with a prayer for pardon. A free pardon is given, but he should get himself absolved of the sin of cousin-murder by performing Prayashchitta."

c20.3

¹ P. D., Vol. I, p. 183.

1. Social Affairs

c20.s1.1

This combination of the secular with the religious authority naturally led the Peshwa to regulate social affairs, and he could not logically avoid this duty even if he would. We have seen how Sambhaji Maharaj had sanctioned the decisions of the Chhandogyamatya as the ecclesiastical head of the state. Similar orders were often issued in the name of Shahu Chhatrapati. Feudal chiefs like the Angrias had undertaken similar duties within their fiefs. On the *shuklatritiya* of Ashwin, Shaka 1656 (the third day of the lighter half of Ashwin or October 6, 1734) Sambhaji Angre Sarkhel with due salutations referred the case of a Brahman woman Savitri to the Dharmadhikaris and other Brahmans well-versed in the Vedas and the Shastras of Kasba Karhad.² It is to be noted here that on these social questions the decision of the *got* or caste people was often confirmed and the Panchayat was appointed for enquiry about old customs as well as decision thereupon. An unreasonable judgment of the got was seldom if ever upheld.

c20.s1.2

² B.I.S.M., Tritiya Sammelan, p. 93.

c20.s1.3

The Peshwas did not exercise this authority of regulating the social affairs because they were Brahmans. It formed part of their duties as the chief magistrates of the state. In one of the documents we find that cases of social customs and rights were sometimes decided by Muham-madan rulers like Aurangzib.³ As the Joshis assert, "On a previous occasion, the servants of the fort and from two to four thousand Mahars of the province applied to Aurangzib Padsha that the Jyotishis should be ordered to officiate in their marriages. After an enquiry about the old customs, he decided that the Jyotishis were not to officiate in Mahars' marriages and up to this time we have worked according to that decision."

c20.s1.4

³ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 279-281.

Jurisdiction over Non-Hindus

c20.s2.1

As the non-Hindu ruler of the country was required to enquire about the social customs of the Hindus and decide disputed social and religious questions, so the Peshwas were also called upon to decide about the religious rights and customs of their non-Hindu subjects. Thus in the year 1754-55, a dispute (Bhikaji and Rustumji Andharu *vs.* others) about the priesthood of the Parsis was decided by an officer of the Peshwa.⁴

c20.s2.2

⁴ P. D., Vol. II, pp. 24-25.

c20.s2.3

In the year 1769-70 a Portuguese clergyman asked for a government patent for his claim to officiate as Priest in the church of Ramedi in Salsette.⁵ "Padre Farelpadra Majardesh, a resident of Revdanda came to the Huzur at the Mukkam of Kasba Poona and informed that the Padreship of the church of Ramedi in Salsette belonged to him. Accordingly Ramaji Mahadev had granted the Padreship to him and the Sarsubhedar also had given him a letter (of confirmation). A patent from the Huzur should be given him. The Padreship was therefore granted to him and he was ordered to enjoy its customary dues. A letter to Ramaji Mahadev :-As the abovementioned clergyman is in government service and cannot attend his duties at the church, he should be allowed to send an agent to perform the duties of the church."

c20.s2.4

⁵ P. D., Vol. VII, p. 342.

c20.s2.5

3. *Spirit of Toleration :*

c20.s2.6

It appears that this extensive jurisdiction effectively exercised by the Peshwas over the social and religious affairs of their non-Hindu subjects did not cause any discontent, for these Brahman rulers were uncommonly tolerant and generous to people who professed a faith other than their own. The grants and farmans issued by the Muhammadan rulers were not only continued but from time to time new Inams were given for the maintenance of mosques and shrines. They liberally contributed to the construction of mosques and churches, and timber from the preserved forests was frequently supplied for such purposes. Cannons were fired thrice at the request of a Portuguese clergyman to celebrate a Roman Catholic festival at Revdanda. Baji Rao II permitted the Portuguese clergymen at Bassein to excercise all their old rights with the single exception of cow slaughter, an act so repugnant to Hindu sentiments. And the other Maratha rulers did not lag behind in this respect. Daulat Rao Sindhia and his officers always joined the Muharam procession dressed in green as Muhammadans should do, and even to-day Muharam remains the most popular festival at Sindhia's capital.

c20.s2.7

4. Superstition :

c20.s2.8

Their solicitude for the suppression of witchcraft shows that the Peshwas were by no means free from superstition. Further instances of their superstitious beliefs are met with in their religious and social regulations. In 1721-22, one Rupee was given as a present to an Agnihotri to counteract the evil effects of the fall of a lizard in the hall of audience.⁶ When on the Dasraday 1740, the flagstaff of the fort at Mahuli was struck by lightning, one hundred Brahmans were feasted and *Shantijap* was repeated a hundred-thousand times.⁷ In the year 1751-52, there was an earthquake in the province of Kalyan Bhivandi and good Brahmans were ordered to assemble for a *Shanti* ceremony (to appease the supposed wrath of the gods).⁸ In 1753-54 performance of a similar ceremony was ordered at fort Visapur,⁹ because of unusual prevalence of sickness in the fort. We come across a set of similar orders during the administration of the second Madhava Rao. In 1773-74 the idol in the famous Pandharpur temple was touched by a lizard, and *Shanti* and *Maharudra* ceremonies were performed; over and above this one thousand Brahmans were fed.¹⁰ In 1775-76 the Brahmans of Kasba Trimbak represented that they were seriously troubled since the discontinuation of the customary sacrifice of a buffalo to the local goddess on the Dasra-day, and the practice was ordered to be reintroduced.¹¹

c20.s2.9

⁴ Biker, Vol. X, p. 276; Sen, Historical Records at Goa.

c20.s2.10

⁶ P. D., Vol. II, p. 195.

c20.s2.11

⁷ P. D., Vol. II, p. 195.

c20.s2.12

⁸ P. D., Vol. II, p. 204.

c20.s2.13

⁹ P. D., Vol. II, p. 205.

c20.s2.14

¹⁰ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 255.

c20.s2.15

¹¹ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 257.

5. Influence of Orthodox Views

c20.s3.1

Sometimes the Peshwas were influenced by orthodox ideas. In 1744-45, the Peshwa was informed by a person from Bassein that during the Portuguese regime some Brahmans of the Yajurvedi class introduced the new unorthodox practice of giving their daughters in marriage to nephews (by sisters). But now as a righteous government was established and as the new practice was quite contrary to the *Dharmashastras*, a fine of Rs. 50 together with the punishment of excommunication should be inflicted on those who adhered to this practice. The suggestion was accepted and instructions were accordingly issued to the officers in charge of Bassein.¹²

c20.s3.2

¹² P. D., Vol. II, p. 198. This custom prevails among the Ganda Saraswat Brahmans commonly known as Shenvis.

c20.s3.3

The first Madhava Rao excommunicated Sakho Moreshwar Belsare Joshi Kulkarni of Jejuri and confiscated his Kulkarni and Joshi watan because he did not observe mourning for a death in another branch of his family. Copies of the order were sent to government officers and the Brahman community of Jejuri.¹³ In 1789-90 during the administration of Madhava Rao II the Prabhus were ordered to desist from pronouncing Vedic *mantras* and other practices peculiar to Brahmans.

c20.s3.4

¹³ P. D., Vol. VII, pp. 360-361.

c20.s3.5

They were strictly ordered not to obstruct the remarriage of a willing widow in their community.¹⁴ But it appears from an order of Baji Rao Raghunath dated 1796-97 that the Prabhus had the right of wearing sacred thread like the Brahmans.¹⁵ Baji Rao II tried to enforce the old Shastric regulations about marriage specially in the Brahman community. He ordered that no Brahman should sell his daughter or keep her unmarried after she was nine years old.¹⁶

c20.s3.6

¹⁴ The order runs as follows: The Brahmans of Kasba Pen in Pargana Sakse came to the Huzur and complained that the Prabhus did not behave according to the regulations formerly made during the administration of the late Peshwa Narayan Rao about their religious conduct and secretly celebrate the Brahman rites. An enquiry should therefore be made and order passed. It has been found that during the regime of the late Peshwa Narayan Rao the following regulations were made and the Prabhus had signed an agreement to behave in accordance to these:
(1) That they would perform no religious rite accompanied by a recital of Vedic Mantras.
(2) That they would not pronounce Vedic Mantras, if any occurs (in course of their religious rites).
(3) That they would not use cooked rice in offering oblations to the dead.
(4) That in performing daily oblations, etc., they would pronounce Pauranic Mantras only and they would not feed Brahmans at their house.
(5) That they would not worship the Shaligram deity.
(6) That they would visit only the temples frequented by Shudras.
(7) That they would salute Brahmans by calling out the word Dandavat and use the same word in saluting men of their own caste.
(8) That they would not oppose the remarriage of any willing widow of their caste. The Peshwa orders strict observance of these regulations, made in his father's regime, and threatens any failure to do so with severe punishment. The Government officers in different Mahals are entrusted with the execution of the above order (for original document see Peshwa's Diaries, Sawai Madhava Rao, Vol. III, pp. 287. 292). This document does not prove the illegality or otherwise of the Prabhu claims, and is cited simply as an instance of state interference in social affairs. I have not the least intention of participating in a controversy which has already become acrimonious, and nothing will hurt me more if the quotation of this document here is given an interpretation likely to offend my many esteemed Prabhu friends.

c20.s3.7

¹⁵ P. D., Vol. V, pp. 251-252.

c20.s3.8

¹⁶ P. D., Vol. V, pp. 253-255.

c20.s3.9

To Mamledar and other officers in Talukas and Mahals. "The Huzur has been informed that Brahmans sell their daughters to their castemen and keep them unmarried after the age of nine years. Thereupon this letter is addressed to you. You should strictly warn all Brahmans in every village under your jurisdiction against sale of girls and keeping them unmarried after nine years. Failure to observe this will not be excused. Make careful enquiry from the day of the receipt of this letter and excommunicate every one who may have sold daughters after the receipt of this letter. About their re-admission into the caste necessary orders will be passed by the Huzur."

c20.s3.10

6. *Widow Remarriage:*

c20.s3.11

Liable to be guided by superstition and orthodox views as the Peshwas were, a modern student will be struck more by the liberal spirit that pervades their social regulations than their occasional tinge of narrowness. We in Bengal are more concerned with the question of widow remarriage and readmission to society of students returning from foreign lands. We have often come across the tax known as Patdam (tax upon widow remarriage) in documents previously quoted and among the regulations about religious conduct of the Prabhus we have seen them stipulating that they would not oppose the remarriage of any willing widow of their caste. Widow remarriage was a common practice among the non-Brahmans of Maharashtra. There were two forms of remarriage—Pat and Muhurta; the Pat seems to have been more informal. Justice Telang says that the celebrated general Parashram Bhau Patwardhan had contemplated the remarriage of his young widowed daughter although the custom did not prevail among the Brahmans and it is said he got the sanction of no less an authority than the celebrated Nyayadhish Ram Shastri.¹⁷ Why Parashram gave up this bold idea is not known, and Brahman widows in Maharashtra like their unfortunate sisters in Northern India have been condemned to life-long misery and austerity.

c20.s3.12

¹⁷ Vasudev Shastri Khare has proved conclusively that there is no evidence for this assertion; see his Adhikar Yoga.

c20.s3.13

Among the non-Brahmans, however, not only widow remarriage but marriage of a woman to a second husband in case of prolonged and continued absence of the first, depriving her of any means of livelihood, was also permitted. An instance of such a marriage is found among the papers in the Daftar of Shahu Chhatrapati. The facts of the case are as follows: One Godji Gaikwad, Patil of Mauja Bahuli, Tarf Muthekhore, represented to the Huzur that Jani, daughter of Manaji Ghorepada Patil of Sayagaon was given in marriage to Jotyaji Savant of Kasba Dahigaon. Jotyaji however left her and went away. She waited for her husband for ten or twelve years but he did not return. In the meantime her parents died and there was nobody in her husband's family to maintain her. Then she went to the King and represented that as she had none to support her, she should be advised what she should do. The King, thereupon, ordered her to marry a second husband according to the Pat rites. Then she came back to Muthekhore and informed the Deshmukh, Deshpande, and the got of the purport of the Raja's order, and they married her to Godji Gaikwad according to the Pat rites. But the latter was arrested by Pant Sachiv and asked by whose authority he had performed the Pat ceremony. Godji answered that he had the authority of the Raja and as he was afraid that in future he might be similarly troubled by others, he requested the King to give him a written authority. An Abhaya Patra was accordingly granted to him.¹⁸

c20.s3.14

¹⁸ P. D., Vol. I, p. 218.

7. Victims of Violence

c20.s4.1

The Hindus of Maharashtra in those days were more considerate towards the gentler sex than they are now, and the government always extended its support to the women in difficulties whenever necessary. The following case will perhaps make the orthodox leaders of the Hindu society gape in wonder. The original document was discovered in the house of the Dharmadhikari of Karhad by Mr. V. K. Rajwade, and has been published by Mr. Datto Vaman Potdar in the reports of the Bharat Itihas Sanshodhak Mandal: "Sambhaji Angre Sarkhel informed with due salutations, all the good Brahmans well-versed in the Vedas and the Shastras and the Dharmadhikaris of Kasba Karhad that Savitri, wife of Purushottam Palsura, a resident of Dhopeshwar in Tarf Rajapur, was going to her mother's house in the village of Rayepatan. On the way she was violated by a Muhammadan, Malik Abdala. The woman returned to her house and related the incident to her people, and a written report of the case was thereupon sent to the headquarters at Vijayadurg. The Muhammadan was brought to the Huzur and decapitated. The woman however prayed that as she was violated by force and against her will and as the Saheb was the upholder of religion, some Prayashchitta should be prescribed for her so that she might conduct herself in the proper way. Thereupon it has been settled that she should perform Prayashchitta in the holy place of Karhad in the presence of the Brahmans and she should be then admitted to the right of dining with her caste people, and to other ordinary rights. Therefore this letter is addressed to you so that you may prescribe a Prayashchitta in accordance with the *Shastras* for the lady in order to admit her as before to the caste and the rights of the Brahmans and give her a letter for her caste people in Prant Rajapur." ¹⁹

c20.s4.2

¹⁹ Tritiya Sammelan Vritta, pp. 93-94.

c20.s4.3

Another document ²⁰ discovered by Mr. Rajwade and published by Mr. Potdar gives an account of a low caste woman who was simply attacked by an intending violator, but was rescued by a wayfarer. The woman although quite innocent and chaste was outcasted. On her taking a solemn oath about her innocence after the usual bath at one of the Sangams she was not only given a *shuddhapatra* or acknowledgment of her innocence but was also publicly honoured by government.

c20.s4.4

²⁰ Ibid, p. 97.

c20.s4.5

It is a pity that after a century and a half of western education we are still unprepared to show that sympathy for such unfortunate victims that the Peshwas readily extended to them under similar circumstances. The Peshwas compelled a reluctant husband to take back his deserted wife, through a sense of social duty, for restitution of conjugal rights could not be claimed by a Hindu wife.

8. Informal Marriage

c20.s5.1

But neither the Peshwas nor the people of those times were unreasonable. Sometimes they would tolerate the omission of form if the motive was good, as the case quoted below amply illustrates. Sambhaji, son of Harji Gauli of Mauja Abte of Tarf Nid in Prant Kalyan came to the Huzur and represented that after the death of Singrup Gauli, his wife, after wandering here and there, came to Sambhaji's father Harji and lived with him. Harji had by her a son named Chimaji before the *Muhurta* marriage could be performed. After that both Harji and the woman died. At the time of his death Harji requested his son Sambhaji to get Chimaji legitimatised with the consent of the *got*. Thereupon Sambhaji and his uncle brought the whole fact of the case to the notice of the *got*, and they consented to get Chimaji married in a Poona family. He requested that the Saheb should issue orders to the *got* of Poona. A letter was issued and the Gaulis of Poona also admitted Chimaji into their caste.²¹

c20.s5.2

²¹ P. D., Vol. VII, pp. 325-326.

c20.s5.3

An informal marriage, though not complete for legal purposes, was declared valid if children were born to the pair. In 1755-56 the carpenter community of Sarkars Junnar, Sangamner, Baglan, and Daulatabad were ordered to acknowledge a *Shastra Vivaha* between Khandoji Banrao, a carpenter of Mauja Redgaon, and a woman after she had borne him a son. Khandoji had to pay a Nazar of Rs. 1,001 to the government on this occasion. "A letter to the Sutar community of Sarkars Junnar, Sangamner, Baglan and Daulatabad: Khandoji Banrao, a Sutar of Mauja Redgaon and Sirbande, of Pargana Chandvad, came to the Huzur, and represented that his first and second wives legally married to him (wives of Lagna marriage) were without any issue. His third wife, a woman of the carpenter caste, was married to him according to the *Shastra Vivaha* rites. Her name was Haibati, and she had borne him a son. He therefore prayed that hi caste men should be ordered to admit her into the caste after the usual assembly of the community. The *got* is ordered to assemble and admit Haibati to their caste."²²

c20.s5.4

²² P. D., Vol. II, p. 208.

c20.s5.5

It seems this laxity in marriage laws was allowed only among the lower castes. But in one case at least, we find that a parent's fault was not allowed to add a lasting stigma to the social position of the son even among higher castes. A letter from Shrinivas Parashram Pratinidhi to the Brahman community of Karhad relates that, the mother of Apaji Ram of Masur, was accused of adultery, and went to her parent's house, but Apaji should have the right of dining with his caste people and he has been purified by a Prayashchitta ceremony. All Brahmans should therefore procure that right for him.²³

c20.s5.6

²³ B. I. S. M., Tritiya Sammelan Vritta, p. 96.

9. Involuntary social Offence

c20.s6.1

We may now turn to those unfortunate outcasts who could not avoid dining with their captors, while prisoners in a Muslim camp. In those days of constant warfare, when everybody ran the risk of being taken a prisoner by their Muhammadan enemies, and as the Muhammadans of Janjira in particular treated their Hindu captives with scant consideration, their friends and relatives had to treat them leniently on their return home. The caste people of the unfortunate man were generally sympathetic and all that the Peshwa had to do was to sanction the decision of the *got*, receive a *Nazar* from the grateful outcast, and to prescribe the necessary Prayashchitta for his readmission to the caste. Sometimes when the Peshwa was directly approached, a Rajsabha (or assembly of the nobles) and a Brahman-sabha were called for considering the case, and a letter was then issued to the Brahmans or to the *got*. One case here, casually selected, will illustrate the system of readmission as it prevailed during the regime of Shahu Chhatrapati. "Putaji-bin Mudhoji Wadghar, Chaugula of Kasba Jiti in Tarf Chambargonde, while employed under Davalji Somvanshi, went with the army to Surat. He fell into the hands of the Mughals and was polluted by them. He remained in the Mughal camp for a year. When Balaji Pandit Pradhan was returning from Delhi, Putaji joined his army and came to his village. He related the facts to his castemen who decided upon admitting him into the caste. The Patils of Chambhargonde, Rasni and other villages communicated the decision of the caste to the Raja and asked his permission to carry it into effect. The Raja directed that Putaji should be first purified according to the Shastras and then admitted into the caste" (Parasnis's summary).²¹

c20.s6.2

²¹ P. D., Vol. I, p. 215

c20.s6.3

Although the caste people could, subject to the government sanction, readmit a polluted member into their rank, they could not without such order exclude anybody from his caste. In 1742-43 Malharji Jadava, a Kunbi, was excluded from society; his caste people and the Shete Mahajan of Ahmadnagar were ordered by Shahu to readmit him into the caste.²⁵

c20.s6.4

²⁵ P. D., Vol. I, p. 219.

c20.s6.5

Not only could an innocent man be protected from the unreasonable oppression of his caste-men, but a man who had willingly or unwillingly committed a social offence could, if repentant, and willing to perform the necessary penance, be forced into his caste. Very recently a Brahman Barrister had petitioned the Bombay High Court to order his caste people to invite him to their ceremonial dinners on the strength of the old practice that prevailed during the Peshwa regime; but their Lordships did not think they could exercise all the prerogatives that the Peshwas enjoyed.²⁶

c20.s6.6

²⁶ I am indebted for this information to Sir Devaprasad Sarvadhikari.

c20.s6.7

10. *Exaction of Dowry prohibited:*

c20.s6.8

As the clergy in mediaeval Europe had tried to bring under their jurisdiction everything directly or indirectly bearing a religious character, so the Peshwa also, as the head of the society, exercised a control over everything social and religious. The question of adoption and marriage came as a matter of course under these headings. The marriage regulations of the Peshwas evinced a liberal spirit that may be profitably imitated by their modern descendants. Baji Rao II strictly forbade any exaction by the bride's father from the bridegroom, and threatened to punish all parties concerned in such transactions.²⁷

c20.s6.9

²⁷ P. D., Vol. V, pp. 266-268.

c20.s6.10

"The officers of the Talukas of Bassein, Vijayadurg, Anjanwel and Revdanda are directed to issue orders preventing the relatives of the bride from taking any sum either as a present or as a loan from the relatives of the bridegroom. The relatives of the bridegroom or other persons settling a marriage were directed to give immediately after the marriage, information to Government of any amount paid by them to the relatives of the brides in contravention to the above order. The following penalties were prescribed:

c20.s6.11

1. The relatives of the bride receiving any such sum to return it to the relatives of the bridegroom and to pay an equal amount as fine to the government.

c20.s6.12

2. If the relatives of the bridegroom or any person settling the marriage failed to give information to government of the amount paid to the relatives of the bride, the relatives of the bridegroom should forfeit to government double the amount paid by them to the relatives of the bride, and the person settling the marriage double the amount received by him." (Summary by B. P. Joshi.)

11. Forcible Marriage

c20.s7.1

These regulations are based on the strict injunctions of the Shastras, but the Peshwas did not hesitate to take advantage of technical flaws to declare a forcible marriage null and void. A marriage was nullified in 1778-79, although *Kanyadan* and other ceremonies were over, and the *Hom* alone remained to be performed.²⁸ Such a marriage is still legally incomplete, but a Hindu will regard such an excuse as flimsy on a Hindu monarch's part. But what seems particularly strange is that they should sometimes go out of their way to order the wedding of marriageable girls without being approached by their parents.²⁹ In fact his double function made the Peshwa's position unique in the world. The Pope could excommunicate a man, but he could not force the execution of his order by a threat of confiscation of property outside his own kingdom. The King can condemn a man to penal servitude, but he cannot further embitter his position by excommunication. The Peshwas could do both yet the combination of these double authority did more good to the Hindu society than harm. In fact it is a matter of wonder that the spirit of reform gradually but surely growing under the auspices of the native rulers, should have been checked and retarded in the Bombay Presidency for more than a generation after its contact with the West.

c20.s7.2

²⁸ P. D., Vol, VI, pp. 260-261.

c20.s7.3

²⁹ P. D., Vol. V. p. 259

c20.s7.4

A peculiar method of demanding justice may here be noticed, because it had its origin in the religious aspect of murder as a sin. Aggrieved parties sometimes drew the attention of the authorities to their grievances by committing suicide.³⁰ The aggressor, or the party giving cause of offence, was held responsible for such deeds, and not only justice was done but the aggressor was sometimes required to perform a penance.

c20.s7.5

³⁰ This was by no means peculiar to Maharashtra. Drury noticed the custom in Travancore also. See Drury, Life and Sport in Southern India.

12. Prisons

c20.s8.1

We may now enquire how prisons were managed and how the great department of police, so necessary for prevention as well as detection of crimes, was worked.

c20.s8.2

There being no regular prisons some rooms in forts were generally used for that purpose.

c20.s8.3

Elphinstone remarks that "imprisonment in hill forts and dungeons was common and the prisoners unless they were people of consideration, were always neglected, and sometimes allowed to starve. Hard labour in building fortifications was not unknown." Elphinstone's remarks were undoubtedly based on his experience of the worst days of the Maratha administration under that bad prince Baji Rao Raghunath. Hard labour it has been found is better for the health, both physical and mental, of the prisoners. And as for the rest, it seems they were treated according to the standard of the time. In Maratha prisons allowance of food was regulated by weight and not by price, and in apportioning prison rations the rank of the prisoner was taken into consideration. But such distinction is not unreasonable; because the standard of living differs in different stations of life. Even in British India, we find some difference in rations allowed for European and Indian prisoners.

13. Leave for Religious Duties

c20.s9.1

The Maratha prisoners sometimes got leave for going home to perform some religious ceremonies like the Shradh of dead parents, marriage of grown-up daughters, and the sacred thread ceremony of grown-up sons, which the Peshwa as the ecclesiastical head could not permit to be neglected. In 1760-61 Govind Rao Apaji, was released from his prison at fort Chandvad, as his two daughters were ten and eleven years old and could not be kept unmarried any longer, and for the marriage expenses, an order was issued to give him in cash or in ornaments Rs. 1,000 out of his family estate which was probably confiscated by the government.³¹ In 1776-77, the wife and son of Trimbak Ganesh Bhat, then imprisoned at Ratnagiri, were released for the performance of the sacred thread ceremony of the boy.³² They were however to come back to their prison after the ceremony was over. In the same year Dhondo Gopal Kelkar, an adherent of the pretender, died in his prison at fort Ghangad. His wife was imprisoned at Ratnagiri. Order was issued to release her for the performance of the Shradh ceremony of her dead husband.³³

c20.s9.2

³¹ P. D., Vol. II, p. 76.

c20.s9.3

³² P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 141.

c20.s9.4

³³ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 142.

14. Consideration for the Prisoners Health

c20.s10.1

At times some consideration was made for the health of the prisoners. In 1753-54 Tulaji Bhosle was transferred from Vyaghragad to Wandangad because the climate of the former place was very cold and unsuitable to the prisoner's health. Among the papers of the elder Madhava Rao's Daftar (1766-67), we find a list of nine persons imprisoned in different places for complicity in a plot with Tulaji Angre.³⁴ The eight male prisoners were all put in irons, while the single convict of the other sex was differently treated. The fact is worth noticing as the names of the male prisoners show that some of them were Brahmans, while the female was an ordinary Kunbin or slave girl. In 1776-77, the shackles of Dhondo Gopal Kelkar were ordered to be removed because his feet were swollen, and he was in consequence unable to stand or sit.³⁵ In 1773-74, Hari Sakhoji and his wife imprisoned in the fort of Sinhagad were released,³⁶ because they were seriously ill. The next year saw the release of nine persons belonging to the family of one Ramchandra Viththal,³⁷ for the climate of the fort Sinhagad did not suit their health. The cause of imprisonment in this case was evidently political, for the brother of Ramchandra, then at large, was ordered to be imprisoned in their stead. In 1781-82 four female prisoners in the fort of Ghangad got saris, bodices and blankets as the place was cold.³⁹ That one of these women was not a Brahman can be easily guessed from her name Darki Kayasthin. Keso Moreshwar Phadke and his wife Rakhma-bai were imprisoned at Revdanda. The lady became pregnant in 1806-07. The fort was an unsuitable place for her delicate condition and Baji Rao Raghunath ordered her to be released and to be sent to her relatives.³⁹

c20.s10.2

³⁴ P. D., Vol. VII, p. 239.

c20.s10.3

³⁵ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 142.

c20.s10.4

³⁶ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 136-137.

c20.s10.5

³⁷ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 139-140.

c20.s10.6

³⁹ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 151-152.

c20.s10.7

³⁹ P. D., Vol. V, p. 225.

c20.s10.8

The wives and relations of prisoners were sometimes permitted to live with them in their prison rooms to look after them whenever their health demanded it. The servants and the relatives in such cases were fed by the government during their residence in the prison. In 1777-78, during the administration of the second Madhava Rao, it was ordered that the wife of Mahadji Ganesh Phadke, a prisoner in the fort of Chandangad, and a female attendant should be permitted to reside with him, for the prisoner felt indisposed and the usual ration should be given them.⁴⁰ Similar permissions were given to the family of Madhava Rao Krishna Bhingarkar in 1785-86.⁴¹

c20.s10.9

⁴⁰ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 143.

c20.s10.10

⁴¹ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 152-153.

15. Treatment of Political Prisoners

c20.s11.1

But it should be remembered that no prisoner could demand any privilege as a matter of right. They had to depend entirely on the favour of those in authority and not infrequently had to pay for it. Sakharam Hari Gupte, a faithful friend and adherent of Raghoba, was very inhumanly treated in the prison. He was loaded with heavy irons, he was kept in unhealthy places, and ultimately ill health, bad food and unusual rigours of the prison life brought about his death. His wife had left no stone unturned in order to secure the government permission for nursing her husband in the prison. She spent her all and paid heavily for the favour which was granted to others. But when the favour was finally purchased her husband needed no nurse He was out of all troubles.

c20.s11.2

But the political prisoners were ordinarily well-treated. Good arrangements were made for their boarding and lodging, as well as for other comforts, although they were strictly watched, and their communication with the outside world, and sometimes with their own warders, was strictly prohibited. Mr. Ranade has made mention of the rigour with which the supporters of Raghoba Dada and the pretender were treated. But we have to remember what trouble these men gave to the state. The Maratha statesmen were not naturally cruel. The pretender was not thrown under the feet of an elephant until he had fled from his prison and endangered the security of the government. The ordinary soldiers of his party were leniently treated, as were some of the adherents of Sumer Singh, the murderer of Narayan Rao.

c20.s11.3

It is a pity that we know very little about the internal management of prisons under the Peshwas. In Europe philanthropists and reformers like John Howard and Elizabeth Fry visited the prisons and exposed their horrible condition. Unfortunately, however, no such graphic accounts of the Maratha prisons have come down to us. In England we are told, "the people were made worse in prison. They left it better instructed in crime than when they entered." We do not know what the effect of a term of imprisonment was upon the morals of a Maratha offender. But whilst the denizens of Enghlish prisons in the 18th century were mostly small debtors, it appears that the prisoners in Maratha hill forts were mostly criminals, and some attempts were made to secure their moral welfare. Kashi, wife of Trimbakji Chawan, left her home and began to practise adultery. She was sent to be imprisoned in the fort of Sarasgad with instructions that strict watch should be kept over her to prevent her immoral practices.⁴²

c20.s11.4

⁴² D. P., Vol, VIII, p. 190.

c20.s11.5

The offenders convicted for adultery were always imprisoned at different places, so that the man could never in future meet the woman.

c20.s11.6

Some extra precaution, it seems, was taken in the case of Brahman prisoners. The death or suicide of a Brahman was commonly believed to bring calamity upon the country. Brahman prisoners tried to secure their release by threats of suicide, and were therefore put under a very strict watch.

c20.s11.7

The greatest defect in the Maratha system was that the prisoner had hardly any right. He might be very leniently treated and he might suffer from all sorts of hardships. Everything depended on the nature of his offence, his rank and wealth; but ordinary offenders escaped uncommon hardship on account of their obscurity.

16. The Police

c20.s12.1

From the prison we shall now turn to the police. Here, as in the judicial administration, it will be convenient to begin from the village. The village police was under the Patil, and the chief police officer in the rural republics was the Mahar. The district police was under the Mamlatdar.

c20.s12.2

In detection of crime the Jaglas or village watchmen, consisting generally of Mahars and Mangs, were helped by criminal tribes as the Ramoshis, Bhils, and Kolis. Unless the stolen property could be recovered or the offence could be traced to some other village, the Police and the criminal classes had to compensate the party robbed. All responsibility however ended with the detection of the offenders or tracing the offence to another village. In the latter case the inhabitants of the place to which the offence had been traced were liable to make compensation. But sufficient proof had to be put forward for such suspicion before the police and the criminal tribes could shake off their responsibility. Mr. V. K. Rajwade has published an incomplete report of such a tracing of offence in the 10th Volume of his Sources of Maratha History (page 116). The case is so interesting that we wish that the rest of the report could have been recovered. Abaji Khando, an officer, was going home with a report from Dada Saheb. He was robbed by thieves near Khandyala. The people of Khandyala traced the offence as far as Bhuinj. Thence it ought to have been traced towards Chingholi, but the Ramoshis, by a common compact, asserted that the Ramoshis of Khadki had committed the offence and also induced Abaji Khando to support their assertion. The Ramoshis of Khadki were thereupon thrown into prison, but there was no proof whatever against them. Abaji Khando's loss was valued at Rs. 30, and it was settled that the Ramoshis of seven villages should subscribe the amount.

17. Criminal Tribes

c20.s13.1

The peace of the country was generally disturbed by Bhils and Kolis living a semi-independent and altogether uncivilised life in the hills and jungles. Complete subjugation of these hill tribes was impossible. Hence their chiefs were held responsible for any theft and disturbance committed by them. For the Police duties performed by the Bhil Naiks, they were permitted by the government to levy certain customary dues or *Haks*. So successful was this Police arrangement that inspite of its evident theoretical defects, Elphinstone recommended its continuance in the early days of the British administration in the Bombay Presidency.

c20.s13.2

When there was any unusual outbreak of theft and robbery, an additional force from the local Shibandi or the neighbouring forts was sent to help the local police. A force of 101 Rohila *Gardis* was sent in 1782-83 to help the Kamavisdar of Nasik, because thefts and dacoities had increased there.¹³ The expenses of these additional police force were met by a house-tax payable by everybody including Brahmans, but the poor were generally exempted. In the year 1777-78 Krishna Rao Anant had to employ 33 Berads and Mangs at an annual expenditure of Rs. 2,104. He was instructed to raise this amount by taxing the well-to-do alone.¹⁴

c20.s13.3

¹³ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 133-134.

c20.s13.4

¹⁴ P. D., Vol. VIII, pp. 132-133.

c20.s13.5

Such additional Police force was also sent on temporary duty for maintaining peace and order in holy places of pilgrimage like Pandharpur and Nasik at the time of great religious festivals when people of all descriptions flocked there. In 1753-54, one hundred and fifty men from the forts of Satara, Chandan and Wandan and twenty-five horsemen were deputed to Pali for one month to maintain order at the annual fair.⁴⁵ In 1788-89 one hundred Gardis were sent to Nasik to keep order among the pilgrims visiting the place during the *Sinhastha*.⁴⁶

c20.s13.6

⁴⁵ P. D., Vol. II, p. 72.

c20.s13.7

⁴⁶ P. D., Vol. VIII, p. 136.

c20.s13.8

18. *The Kotwal:*

c20.s13.9

In big cities the police was placed under an officer called Kotwal. His duties included regulation of prices and taking of census. The duties of the officer are enumerated as follows in a document issued in 1767-68, for the guidance of Janardan Hari, when he was appointed to the Kotwalship of Poona:

c20.s13.10

1. Minor disputes in the Peths and in the Kasba should be disposed of by the Kamavisdars of the several Peths: disputes of importance should be disposed of by the Kotwal.

c20.s13.11

2. The Kotwal should fix the prices of goods and a list of the prices fixed should be daily submitted to the Government.

c20.s13.12

3. The Kotwal should arrange to supply labourers as required by Government from among the artizans and the members of the several castes in the city; sales and purchases of land sites should be made with the permission of the Kotwal who should prepare the necessary documents and receive the fees due to Government.

c20.s13.13

4. The Kotwal should take the census; he should keep a record of all persons coming into and leaving the city. The Kamavisdars of the Peths should supply him with information on this point.

c20.s13.14

5. Should the Kotwal consider any regulation followed by the last Kotwal or any new regulation to be fit for adoption, he should report it to the Huzur and act in accordance with such orders as might then be issued.

c20.s13.15

6. All disputes relating to roads, lanes and houses should be disposed of by the Kotwal.

c20.s13.16

7. The Kotwal should furnish monthly accounts to Government.

c20.s13.17

8. The Kotwal should issue orders for any proclamation being made by the beat of drum.

c20.s13.18

9. Professional gamblers should not gamble without the permission of the Kotwal who should levy from them the usual fees. Other persons are not allowed to gamble.⁴⁷

c20.s13.19

⁴⁷ P. D., Vol. VII, pp. 233-236. Summary by B. P. Joshi.

c20.s13.20

It is needless to say that his ample authority gave the Kotwal ample opportunities for abusing it. The abuse of power reached its climax in the notorious Ghasiram, a Kanojia Brahman, who occupied the post of Kotwal at Poona during the administration of Nana Fadnavis. Much capital has been made out of his case by European writers. Grant Duff remarks, "No instance of greater neglect on the part of an administration, or of more extraordinary criminality in a subordinate officer, is recorded in the annals of any state than the case of Ghasiram, Kotwal, or Police Superintendent, of the city of Poona. This man, a Brahman native of Hindoostan, employed the power with which he was vested in perpetrating the most dreadful murders. People disappeared and no trace of them could be found. Ghasiram was suspected, but Nana Fadnavis refused to listen to complaints, apparently absurd from their unexampled atrocity." I do not think that Ghasiram's case reflects any discredit on the administration in general.

c20.s13.21

*19. Forbes on Ghasiram's case:*

c20.s13.22

It appears from a contemporary English account that there was not a tithe of evidence against Ghasiram, and he was an unfortunate victim of undeserved suspicion. According to Forbes, who derived his information from no less a personage than Sir Charles Malet, the mob was encouraged "by many persons desirous of mortifying the ruling minister through the ignominy of the cutwal his dependant." The Peshwa weakly surrendered the 'foreigner' into the hands of an infuriated mob that subjected the Kotwal to all sorts of humiliation and finally stoned him to death.⁴⁸

c20.s13.23

⁴⁸ Forbes, Oriental Memories, Vol. II, p. 135. The full account of the affair will be found in a letter published in the 9th volume of Aitihasik Lekha Sangraha by Vasudev Shastri Khare.

c20.s13.24

The officers of Indian Police in those days were not without their faults, and we cannot say that supervision by English officers has absolutely purged that department of corruption even now. About thirty years ago, a Brahman officer of Bengal Police was accused and convicted of an offence, which would make Ghasiram blush and cry shame. That does not prove any neglect of supervision on the part of the higher authorities. Abuse there was, but it seldom assumed such a serious character as to be accounted a great public danger. Elphinstone remarks, "The Police however was good on the whole, murder or robberies attended with violence and alarm were very rare; and I have never heard any complaints of the insecurity of property."

c20.s13.25

Baji Rao II, weak and wicked as he was, did much for the improvement of the police. A special officer called *Tapasnavis* was appointed by him for general supervision and inspection of the police force. They were quite independent of the Mamlatdars and their jurisdiction did not always coincide with revenue districts.

c20.s13.26

20. *The Metropolitan Police :*

c20.s13.27

The Metropolitan Police at Poona became a model body during the administration of the last of the Peshwas. The efficiency and honesty of this body had extorted the applause of critics like Elphinstone and Tone. William Henry Tone served in the army of Baji Rao II, and he had first-hand knowledge of the Peshwa's Government. His remarks therefore claim our best regards. Tone says, "It is little remarkable for anything but its excellent Police which alone employs thousand men. After the firing of the gun, which takes place at ten at night, no person can appear in the streets without being taken up by the Patroles, and detained prisoner until dismissed in the morning by the Kotwal. So strict is the discipline observed that the Peshwa himself had been kept prisoner a whole night for being out at improper hours." No less than Rs. 9,000, Elphinstone tells us, were spent for the upkeep of this splendid body consisting of a large number of peons, horse patrols and Ramoshis. Lt. Edward Moor and his brother officers visited Poona in 1792 and they heard that the police of Poona was "uncommonly well regulated." 49

c20.s13.28

⁴⁹ Moor, A Narrative of the Operations of Captain Little's Detachment (London 1794), p. 364.

c20.s13.29

We cannot say that the London police of the time was as efficient as the Poona police, before its reorganisation by Peel. Sir Spencer Walpole says, "There was no efficient police force in London. A small horse patrol nominally guarded the suburbs; a small foot patrol nominally guarded the metropolis. The horse patrol consisted of only fifty-four, the foot patrol of only one hundred men. The peace of London, otherwise, depended on the parish constables in the day time, on the old watch at night. The ingenuity of man could have hardly devised a feebler protection."