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

22 VYAVAHĀRAMAYŪKHA [ S I. 2, 4 II. 1, 1.
[ M. p. 16. l. 11 p. 1. 1.
Where a doubt arises as to a document or the statements of witnesses
and where inference is uncertain ordeal is the means of clearing up (the
doubt)
The same author lays down an option between witnesses and ordeals in certain
cases
When the dispute relates to sāhasa (robbery and the like) in cases of
violence of injury and speech (assault and defamation) and in all matters
springing from the use of force either witnesses or ordeals (are admissible
as proof) In debts either a document witnesses even some reasoning or
supernatural modes of proof are allowed from a desire for the good of the
people ¹
Yuktileśa means a portion of reasoning vācika pāruṣye means in de-
famation consisting of abuse or reviling in the form you are the slayer of a
brāhmaṇa As for the text of Kātyāyana in violence of words and in (dis-
putes for) land ordeal should not be resorted to, it refers to libels of a petty
character The mention of land includes (by implication) immoveable pro-
perty of every kind as Pitāmaha says in disputes about immoveable property
ordeals should be excluded This prohibition of ordeals holds good when
witnesses are available, and the same author (Pitāmaha) says to the same
effect one should support these disputes (about immoveables) by witnesses
documents and possession. The same author (says)
*In cases where there exists no writing nor possession nor witnesses
and there is no scope for ordeal, the king is the authority (he should
decide as he thinks fit) In the case of disputes of an uncertain character
which it is not possible to determine (with the usual means of proof) the
king is the authority since he is the lord of everything
Now (begins the discussion of) writings
On this Bṛhaspati (p 304 v 3) says
Writing is declared to be of three sorts, viz writing of the king that
written at a particular place² and that written in ones own hand Their
subdivisions again are numerous.
As to the text of Vasiṣṭha writings are known to be of two kinds viz
popular and royal wherein a two-fold division is declared that is due to
non-recognition of a difference between writings written at a particular place
and those written in ones own hand The words laukika and jānapada are
synonyms, as the author of the Saṅgraha says writings are declared to be
1 These two verses are ascribed to Kātyāyana by the Par M
2. Sthānakṛta (written in a particular place) seems to mean written in a well
known public place by professional scribes appointed by the king or his officers and attested
by witnesses. This was probably a substitute for the modern requirement of registration.
P 31 (text)