[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968) › c9.s5.30 # Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c9.s5.30 Republics in Ancient India, c. 1500 B.C.–500 B.C. c9.s5.30 - **Language:** English ### [c9.s5.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5.30) We have suggested already that in most cases criminals and questions of property were decided by a "Jury of Eight", members of the Licchavian Council of nine. In order to ensure impartiality and proper justice to the criminal or defendent, the chief \*rājā\* did not figure on the bench, leaving the remaining eight to decide the case by a simple majority of 5 to 3. In most cases however, unanimity might have been attained. The chief king was probably the highest court of appeal. We have no definite evidence to show the existence of a big court in cases causing great controversy, such as treason or crimes against the republic or its officers. A large court existed at Athens for the trial of such cases, but we cannot say with certainty that a similar one existed at Vesālī, though it is quite probable. "The court which tried Socrates was composed of 501 citizens, and was a subdivision of the largest court of 6,000 citizens, chosen by lot, which dealt with such cases. There was no jury in the modern sense; the decision of the court was that of the majority vote." ¹ - [Previous: c9.s5.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5.29) - [Next: c9.s5.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5.31) - [Up: c9.s5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.sharma-1968.c9.s5.30) · Pramāṇa