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

28 VYAVAHĀRAMAYŪKHA [ S. II. 1 1-3
[ M p. 191 23-p. 20 L15
Vyāsa speaks of the substitute of the king (in issuing royal edicts)
The minister for peace and war when ordered by the king himself may
write down the royal edict on copperplate or on cloth
The same author says that the king should write down his assent in such
a case
(The minister should write down) the boundaries and measurements
and the king should write with his own hand 'this has the assent of me
the king, so and so and the son of such and such.'
Sannives'am pramāṇaṁ ca—these words are to be connected with the pre-
ceding text. Vasiṣṭha mentions four kinds of royal writings
A śāsana (edict) should be known as the first, another is jayapatra
(then there are) ājñāpatra and prajñāpanā patra, royal writing is (thus)
four-fold.¹ "That by which feudatory chiefs, officers, and governors of
provinces are commanded (by the king) to carry out some business is
called an ājñāpatra (document of command). That letter by which
some business is communicated to a sacrificial priest, the family priest,
a preceptor and other revered and worthy persons is called a writing of
request.
Śāsana and jayapatra have been explained above. Yājñavalkya (II 91) says
When (a document) is in another country, when the letters (or words)
of it have become doubtful (or difficult to make out), when it is lost, or
its ink has been rubbed off, when it is stolen, torn into pieces, burnt, cut
asunder, (the king) should cause another writing to be made.
Nārada (pp. 77-78, v. 142) says
When a document is placed in another country, when it is shattered
into pieces, when its letters have become effaced, when it is stolen, then
time should be granted (for its production) in cases where it exists;
and if it does not exist the decision must rest on the (evidence of) the
witnesses (who saw it executed).
Draṣṭāraḥ means 'witnesses'; in the absence of witnesses, supernatural proof
(should be resorted to) as Kātyāyana says
In a judicial proceeding where there is no writing nor witnesses, (the
king or judge) should prescribe supernatural proof (ordeals, etc.).
Yājñavalkya (II. 92) says:
The genuineness of a document about which there is a doubt (or dis-
pute) may be established by (comparison with other) documents that
are (admittedly) in the hand of the person (who is alleged to have

1. Vide notes to V. M. pp. 53-54 for the quotations from Kauṭilya about ājñāpatra
   and prajñāpanāpatra.
   P. 29 (text)