ranslation of literature from an Indian viewpoint, everyone notice that till 19th century Indian translators were not keen about being factual to the unique in manner and matter. As a matter of fact, the epics and puranas, the Sanskrit classics were “recited, adopted, undermined and translated” during the Middle Ages, without any conscience about preciseness or accuracy to the master piece of any work. The authenticity has raised an important question when started translating the Bible into Indian languages. Instead of directly dealing with translation in country like India let us find out the position of Indian languages in the field of translation. As everyone knows that Indian populations have multilingualism though they were given more emphasis on a common heritage. There were original versions of Mahabharata and Ramayana in all main languages and therefore it was not needed to be translated. The group of people those who were illiterate were enjoying it orally from their own language. But when the time comes of educated people observed at other languages by the percolate of English language. Translation was promoted in their own way by British for their profit. ‘Manusmriti’ was translated in order to govern Indians through their native laws by William Jones’. But the self-awareness brought by promotion of translation and the outcome of the independence movement directed to a large amount of translation activity, which made the patriot works of Bankimchandra in Bengali and Khandekar in Marathi available to lots of readers in difference languages. The aspiration of translation was enhanced because of the Nobel Prize of literature in 1913 and it arose speedily after 1947; the main reasons behind it was getting the national literary awards. As it was observed, translation is frequently came with “the institutional arrangement of state power” Translation of Indian Literature into English has progressed to the centre with concern expressed by our reviewers, publishers, seminar organizers and other such groups from the colonial times. It is fact that that we do not have an exact comparable word ‘translation’ in any languages of India. What we have used till now are ‘anuvad’ in Sanskrit, ‘tarjuma’ in Arabic, ‘rupantar’ in Bangla, ‘vivartanam’ in and ‘bhashantar’ in Hindi which recommends that the concept of ‘translation’ was alienate to us; what we appreciated in specific language translator created a similar one in other languages, which connotes that translation was not familiar writing for us till the arrival of Western culture. As everyone knows ‘anuvad’ and ‘rupantar’ which is used as a meaning of translation, where there was not any need of loyalty to the original text. The idea of faithful rendering of the original, even of a literary work, came to us from West, with the translation of the Bible into Indian languages by the Christian Missionaries. Whereas the inherited trend in India of change of from implies the compliment paid to a translation “that it does not read like a translation to bind to the main text.” This demonstration>