India has a recorded legal history that begins since Vedic times, and some sort of civil justice system may have existed during the Bronze Age and the Indus Valley civilization. Law as a matter of religious prescriptions and philosophical discourse has an illustrious history in India. From the Vedas, Upanishads and other religious texts, it was a fertile field enriched by practitioners of various Hindu philosophical schools and later by Jains and Buddhists. Historically, India was a collection of kingdoms and empires and the legal system was based solely on common law. Due to British rule from 1750 to 1947, large parts of Indian law are essentially based on British law, the British legal system, and the English language. During the transition of the Mughal legal system, the lawyers under this regime, the “vakils”, also followed suit, although for the most part they retained their former role as client representatives. The doors of the newly established supreme courts were closed to Indian practitioners, as the right to hear was limited to members of English, Irish and Scottish professional associations. Subsequent rules and statutes resulted in the Legal Practitioners Act of 1846, which opened the profession regardless of nationality or religion. Criminal law deals with laws relating to violations of the rule of law or public injustice. Criminal law is governed by the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Indian Penal Code of 1860 defines the crime, its nature and penalties, while the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 defines the exhaustive procedure and punishment of crimes. India has the oldest judicial system in the world. No other judicial system has an older or higher pedigree.  Britain`s Henry Maine described the legal system of ancient India “as an apparatus of cruel absurdities.” An Anglo-Indian jurist remarked the following about what he called “the oriental habits of life” of the Indians before the British appeared in India: “It (British rule in India) is a record of experiments undertaken by foreign rulers to govern foreign races in a foreign country, to adapt European institutions to Eastern lifestyles. and to put at the top certain laws among the peoples, who always associated the government with an arbitrary and uncontrolled authority”. Alan Gledhill, a retired member of the Indian civil service, wrote that when the British took power in India, “there was a lack of legal principles.” These may be due to sheer ignorance or imperialist self-interest or contempt for Indian culture and civilization that were part of the imperialist worldview that dominated British lawyers, historians and thinkers at the height of imperialism. But the effect of this false statement, which has few parallels in history, has been to create a false image of India`s judicial and legal system, both in India and abroad. Law enforcement in India is carried out by many law enforcement agencies. Like many federal structures, the nature of the Indian constitution prescribes law and order as a subject of the state, so that most of the policing is carried out by the respective states and territories of India. The Indian legal system is one of the oldest legal systems in the history of the world. It has changed and evolved over the past few centuries to absorb inferences from legal systems around the world. The Constitution of India is the source of the Indian legal system. It shows the Anglo-Saxon character of the judiciary, which derives essentially from the British legal system. India is a country with a diverse culture, local customs and different conventions that do not contradict the statue or ethics. Persons of different religions and traditions are governed by the various personal status laws with regard to family matters. The Constitution of India has characteristics of federal and uniform constitutions and is quasi-federal in nature. With the advent of the British Raj, there was a break in tradition, and Hindu and Islamic law was abolished in favour of British common law.  As a result, the country`s current legal system derives largely from the British system and has few, if any, ties to pre-British Indian legal institutions.  On the civil front, the Code of Civil Procedure provides for the Munsiffs Court (with limited financial jurisdiction). The subdivision and the district court differ financially and territorially. There may be special courts for specific purposes as well as administrative and tax tribunals to adjudicate certain categories of disputes. Thus, there are motor vehicle compensation courts, VAT tribunals, electoral commissions, regional courts, etc., all of which are judicial bodies that decide disputes in the areas assigned to them. Appeals by these courts are usually brought before the high courts and, exceptionally, with a second appeal to the Supreme Court. The administration of justice requires the cooperation not only of the parties and judges, but also of the registries, which include lawyers, court staff and paralegal staff who assist lawyers and judges. Secular law in India varied considerably from region to region and from ruler to ruler. Civil and criminal judicial systems were essential features of many ruling dynasties of ancient India. Excellent secular judicial systems existed under the Mauryas and the Mughals, the latter giving way to the current common law system. A relic of the usurpation of imperial power is the name Fauzdari still gives today for criminal trials. After the conquest of Bengal by the British, the process of replacing the Mughal judicial system with the British began.