Although the Mughal dynasty continued till 1857, it was in decay since the death of Muhiyuddin Muhammad Awrangzeb in 1118/1707. For the purpose of this work we will concentrate on the judicial system of Jalal uddin Akbar (1556-1605) and Awrangzeb (1658-1707) because the Empire under these two is believed to be at its climax. However, between the reigns of these two the contribution of Nuriddin
... [Show full abstract] Muhammad Jahangir (d.1037/1627) cannot be ignored and must be discussed to have a complete picture. Akbar and Awrangzeb were very different in terms of religiosity and presented distinct and opposing political models. Akbar tried to create a hybrid between Islam and Hinduism – in his new order (tariqat) which was believed to be a synthesis with Hinduism, providing some form of accommodation on the cultural and religious planes. The latter rejected this model outright. The former was praised by his Hindus subject while the latter by the Muslim population. The judicial system under both Akbar and Awrangzeb were very much similar, as will be explained below. With the exception of Awranzeb, the Mughul governments in India were purely secular in nature. Although the Emperors were deeply religious men, they did not view themselves as monarchs who had to guard the interests of only one section of their subjects. In matters of governance they held the scales evenly balanced between all communities under their sway.