The sources of Dharma in ancient Indian legal system included the Vedas (Shruti), Smritis, and

Achara. The Vedas are considered divine scriptures that were revealed by God to sages. They
contain principles like truthfulness, non-violence etc. Smritis refer to remembered traditions and
include Dharmashastras like Manu Smriti which impart Dharma knowledge. Certain aspects of
Dharma like social obligations are specifically taught in Smritis. The administration of justice
was the primary duty of the King according to ancient Indian texts. The King was responsible for
upholding law and order and ensuring public security. He was aided by a capable judicial system.
Evidence suggests Ashoka instructed his judicial officers to follow Dharmashastras impartially.
By the 6th century CE, legal codes dating to 1st century BCE had developed into a procedure
called Vyavahara.Ancient texts point to existence of a hierarchy of courts with certain elements
of appellate authority. At lowest level were family councils followed by trade councils and
village assemblies. Higher courts included courts established by King to try violent crimes. The
King's court was the highest court which the King presided over along with a Chief Justice and
judges. Jurisdiction of courts increased with crime severity and punishments too were greater for
higher courts.An overview of the selection process and qualifications of judges is provided.
Ancient texts advise Kings to select judges well-versed in legal literature, with characteristics
like being deeply learned, adhering to evidence-based reasoning, and ability to be impartial.

The article "Ancient Legal System of India" by Tanisha Trehan mentions three sources of
Dharma, which are as follows:

1. Vedas or Shruti: The Vedas are considered to be of divine origin and constitute the Shruti,
which is Sanskrit for 'that which the Rishis have heard from God'. The Vaidika Dharma or
Shrauta Dharma, the principle of Dharma taught in the Vedas, is regarded as infallible, universal,
and eternal.

2. Smriti: The Smritis refer to the 'memory of a tradition'. These are texts that impart Dharma
knowledge and are passed down from one generation to the next. The primary Smriti texts that
impart Dharma knowledge are the "Dharmashastras," and they are occasionally interpreted to
refer solely to the Dharmashastras.

3. Achara: This refers to the moral behavior or righteous deeds of those who comprehend and
know the Vedas. When the Vedas and Smriti are silent or unavailable to provide any guidance,
the teachings of Achara are relied upon.

These sources of Dharma played a significant role in shaping the legal and moral framework of
ancient Indian civilization.
The passage discusses the hierarchy of courts that existed in ancient India. At the lowest level
were the family courts/organizations (Kula), which resolved disputes between families with
similar backgrounds or within families. Next were the Trade or Professional Councils (Shreni)
that resolved disputes between businesspeople, professionals, and artisans. The Village
Assembly (Gana) was a larger assembly of respected village elders that served as arbitrators.
Higher than these were the Adhikrita courts appointed by the king to administer justice. These
included the Mudrita, a higher-level court with royal access, and the Pratishtitha established in a
particular village. The Apratishtitha was a mobile court that would meet in a specific location
when summoned by the king to hear particular cases. The highest court was the Sasita or King's
Court, where the King personally served as moderator along with a Chief Justice and group of
judges called Sabhyas. The passage also notes some ancient legal codes dating back to the 1st
century BCE that had developed court procedures known as "Vyavahara" by the 6th century. It
discusses how administration of justice was the King's primary duty according to ancient Indian
law texts, which emphasized the need for a capable judicial system to uphold Dharma-based
justice. This included preventing crimes and ensuring public security.In summary, the passage
outlines the hierarchical structure of courts that existed in ancient India according to ancient legal
texts, ranging from low-level family courts up to the highest court of the King. It also discusses
the development of early legal codes and procedures.

The ancient legal system of India had a hierarchy of courts that cases could be heard in. At the
lowest level were family courts, where disputes between family members would be resolved by
senior family members. Above this were trade or professional councils (shreni) which would
resolve disputes between members of the same trade or profession. These councils were made up
of respected senior citizens in that field. The next level was the village assembly (gana), which
was like a village council or panchayat system. It comprised respected village elders who would
hear disputes.The king would establish Adhikrita courts to try cases involving violence (sahasa
crimes). These courts had different designations depending on their location - Mudrita courts had
royal seals while Pratishtita courts were established in a particular village or town. The Adhikrita
courts could review decisions of lower courts like the Pratishtita, Apratishtitha and Mudrita
courts. Apratishtitha courts were mobile courts that would meet when summoned by the king to
hear a particular case. The highest court was the Sasita or King's Court, where the King
personally presided over cases along with a chief justice and group of judges. Finally, the
ultimate decision maker was the King (Nripa) himself, who was bound by dharma principles in
delivering judgments.So in summary, there was a hierarchical judicial system from family courts
up to the King's court, mirroring the structure of courts today from lower to higher courts.

These classifications provide insights into the diverse and hierarchical nature of the courts in
ancient Indian civilization. Each type of court had specific functions and authority, contributing
to the overall legal system of the time.
The ancient texts mentioned that judges should possess several qualifications. They should be
knowledgeable about professional legal literature, honest, and behaviorally capable of absolute
impartiality between a friend and an enemy. Additionally, they should be deep researchers,
well-educated in the norms of evidence, responsible, law-abiding citizens, and have a certain
temperament, including being pleasant, kind, brilliant, and active, but not pretentious. Judges
must also be impartial, independent, and fearless to a certain extent. These qualifications were
emphasized to ensure the integrity and competence of the judges in the ancient legal system.

The ancient legal system of India had a hierarchy of courts that cases could be heard in. At the
lowest level were family courts, where disputes between family members would be resolved by
senior family members. Above this were trade or professional councils (shreni) which would
resolve disputes between members of the same trade or profession. These councils were made up
of respected senior citizens in that field. The next level was the village assembly (gana), which
was like a village council or panchayat system. It comprised respected village elders who would
hear disputes.The king would establish Adhikrita courts to try cases involving violence (sahasa
crimes). These courts had different designations depending on their location - Mudrita courts had
royal seals while Pratishtita courts were established in a particular village or town. The Adhikrita
courts could review decisions of lower courts like the Pratishtita, Apratishtitha and Mudrita
courts. Apratishtitha courts were mobile courts that would meet when summoned by the king to
hear a particular case. The highest court was the Sasita or King's Court, where the King
personally presided over cases along with a chief justice and group of judges. Finally, the
ultimate decision maker was the King (Nripa) himself, who was bound by dharma principles in
delivering judgments.So in summary, there was a hierarchical judicial system from family courts
up to the King's court, mirroring the structure of courts today from lower to higher courts.

In conclusion, the document underscores the enduring relevance of the ancient Indian legal
system, emphasizing its compatibility with the current legal system and its pivotal role in
shaping the legal framework of modern India. It also highlights the importance of a supportive
system of peaceful living, necessitated by a proper and effective law and order system, as well as
an active court, for the advancement of civilization. The document provides a comprehensive
exploration of the ancient legal system of India, encompassing its foundational principles,
judicial hierarchy, and punitive measures, shedding light on its enduring relevance and
compatibility with the current legal system.