Criminal Justice System In India In The Past
In criminal law there was an elaborate classification of offences. Apart from offences like rape, dacoity and the like (which may be called conventional offences), there were other offence like not running to the rescue of another person in distress. Punishment was prescribed for causing damage to trees in city parks, to trees providing shades, to trees bearing flowers and fruits and to trees in holy places. It was an offence for a judge to give a wrong decision out of corrupt motive. Perjury by a witness attracted severe penalty. There were six types of punishment, namely, fine, reprimand, torture, imprisonment, death and banishment.
Theft was classified into three kinds according to the value of the thing stolen. There was also a classification of thieves. Some were considered open or patent thieves and others secret thieves. Open or patent thieves included traders who employed false weights and measures, gamblers, quacks and persons who manufactured counterfeit articles. Secret thieves were those who moved about clandestinely.
Adultery, according to Shastras, consisted of three categories. Flirting about with another man's wife, dallying with her clothes or sending her a pimp, being with her in an unfrequented place, or bathing in her company in the same pool or holding conversation with her, with winks, gallantries and smiles passing on both sides, or at any improper time constituted one of the species of adultery and was punishable ordinarily with small fines only. Sending a woman sandalwood, a string of beads, drinks, clothes or gold or jewels was another species of adultery punishable with larger fines. Sleeping together or delaying upon the same carpet or kissing, caressing, or embracing a woman or carrying her into a retired place with her tacit consent was the third and worst species of adultery, punishable with still larger fines.
A mediator or go-between could also be punished with fines; and the woman was not considered exempt from punishment. Manu prescribed the following oath for parties and witnesses: "Let the Judge cause a Brahmin to swear by his truth or sat, a Kshatriya by his chariot or the animal he rides or by his weapons, a Vaishya by his cattle, grain and gold, and a Shudra by imprecating on his head the guilt of all grievous offences. "
If the idea of oath, according to Bentham, is to have a ceremony composed of words and gestures by which the Almighty is engaged eventually to inflict on the taker of the oath punishment in quantity and quality in the event of his doing something which be engages not to do or omitting to do something which he in like manner engages to do the oath administered in ancient India was perhaps more effective compared to the present lifeless recital of a formula about swearing to speak the truth.
