व्यवहारमयूख (नीलकण्ठ भट्ट - पश्चिमी भारत की हिन्दू न्याय-संहिता एवं व्यवहार कोष)

8 VYAVAHĀRAMAYŪKHA [ S. I 1 18-10
[ M p 6 ll 8-26
ment which serves as prāyaścitta say that (the passage lays down) the
mere exemption (of those people) from legal punishment while in other coun-
tries both legal punishment and penance will have to be suffered ¹ Vyāsa
( says )
The decision (of a litigation) between merchants craftsmen and
such others and between those who subsist on agriculture and the stage can-
not be given by others (who know nothing of these avocations), but it
should be assigned to those only who are well versed in these (avocations) ²
Manu ( 8 390 ) says
The king who desires his own welfare should not (himself) declare a
special decision in the case of men of the three higher castes who have a
dispute among themselves in connection with the orders (āśramas) to
which they belong (i e as brahmacārins, householders &c )
Kātyāyana ( says )
At the (proper) time (the king) should question the petitioner who
bows to him and stands before him what is your business and what
is your grievance, do not be afraid and speak out man! By whom
where when and from what (motive were you troubled) ? Thus he should
question the (applicant) when he comes to the court Having considered
along with the sabhyas and the brāhmaṇas what he speaks when thus ques-
tioned (the king) if the cause be proper should then hand over to him (to
the applicant) a seal (i e order under seal) or should order the servant
(called sādhyapāla above) for summoning (the defendant) ³
Nārada ( p 17 v 47 ) says
The applicant who has a dispute may put under restraint or arrest (the
defendant) who does not stand up to meet (i e who absconds or avoids) the
claim that is to be investigated or who minds not the words of the claimant
till the approach of the summons (i e the sealed order or the sādhyapāla)
1 According to the plain words of the text the doing of the various acts in the respect-
ive countries does not render the people liable to incur punishment nor to undergo prāyaścitta;
some say that they escape only punishment at the king's hand (but are liable to undergo
prāyaścitta) in those countries, while in other countries people guilty of these acts would be
liable to undergo both prāyaścitta and legal punishment. People guilty of offences were sup-
posed to be purified by undergoing punishment at the hands of the king (is legal punish-
ment was a kind of prāyaścitta ) Vide Manu 8. 318.
2. Vide Raghunathji v. the Bank of Bombay I. L. R. 34 Bom. 2, 8 (=11 Bom. L.R. p. 255)
where this passage is quoted and it was held that where the manager of a family firm borrow-
ed for the family firm without legal necessity the debt would be binding even on minor
members. Mandlik translates 'raṅgopajīvinaḥ' as 'among dyers' but this is wrong. The usual
meaning of raṅga is 'theatre or stage'. Mandlik himself on p. 21 translates raṅgāvatārī as
'performer on the stage'. This text does not mean that the king is not to decide these matters
but that he should not decide them hastily without the aid of experts.
3. In Sanskrit the same word is used for plaintiff and complainant, as there was no
clear-cut distinction made in ancient India between civil and criminal courts and procedure.