JURISPRUDENCE (UNIT 2)

Historical School of Jurisprudence

INTRODUCTION

Laws should change to match the changing needs of people. The Historical School of
Jurisprudence believes that laws are made by people and should adapt to the evolving
needs of society. People know their needs better than anyone else.
Historical School of Jurisprudence relies on the customs and habits of people, which
change as their needs change. It’s also known as the Continental School of Jurisprudence.

The Historical School rejects the idea that judges create laws or that laws have a divine
origin. To quote Salmond, “Historical jurisprudence is the part of legal history that deals
with the general principles governing the origin and development of law and how various
influences shape it. It also covers the origins and development of essential legal ideas and
principles, which are fundamental to the philosophy of law. These same ideas and
principles are explored from a different perspective by analytical jurisprudence. Historical
jurisprudence is essentially the history of the foundational principles and concepts of the
legal system.”

What is the Historical School of Jurisprudence?

The Historical School of Jurisprudence is a legal philosophy that emerged in the 19th
century, emphasising the significance of historical and societal context in understanding
and shaping legal systems. This school of thought contends that laws are not abstract,
universal principles but are intricately connected to the customs, traditions and evolving
consciousness of a society.

Key figures such as Friedrich Carl von Savigny, Montesquieu and Georg Friedrich Puchta
played pivotal roles in developing this jurisprudential approach. Savigny’s concept of
“Volksgeist” highlighted the collective will of the people in moulding the law, while
Montesquieu emphasised the necessity of adapting laws to changing social and
environmental conditions. Puchta refined and rationalised these ideas.

The Historical School of Jurisprudence acknowledges the value of legislation and

codification while stressing the continuous evolution of laws to meet the needs of a
progressing society. It has significantly enriched our comprehension of law as a dynamic
reflection of the human experience across time, providing valuable insights into the
development and transformation of legal systems.
Reasons for the Origin of Historical School of Jurisprudence

The Historical School believe that law is made from people according to their changing
needs. Habits and customs are the main sources of the Historical School of Jurisprudence.
According to Dias, Historical school arose as a reaction against the natural law theories.

The reasons for the emergence of this school are:

⚫ It came as a reaction to the natural school of law.
⚫ Natural school of law believes that the law is originated from some divine power.
Natural law is also called the Eternal law. It exists since the beginning of the world. It is
closely associated with the morality and intention of God. Indian constitution has some
relevance of the natural law in its articles.
Historical school of Jurisprudence focuses on the formation of law by people not by some
divine origin.

⚫ It opposes the ideology of the analytical school of jurisprudence.

⚫ Analytical school of jurisprudence is also called Austinian School. It is established by
John Austin. The subject matter of Analytical school of Jurisprudence is positive law. It
focuses on the origin of law the judges, state and legislators. Historical School laid
emphasis on the formation of law by people through customs and habits, not by the
judges and superior authority.

Jurists of Historical School of Jurisprudence

Montesquieu

According to Sir Henry Maine, the first legal scholar to use the Historical School of
Jurisprudence in understanding legal institutions was Montesquieu. Montesquieu laid the
groundwork for the historical school of thought in France. He believed that it was not
meaningful to debate whether a law was good or bad in isolation, as the quality of a law
depended on the social, political and environmental conditions of a society.

Montesquieu’s conclusion was that laws were shaped by factors such as climate, local
circumstances, accidents, or even deceit. He argued that laws should adapt to the changing
needs of society. However, Montesquieu did not establish a specific theory or philosophy
regarding the relationship between law and society. Instead, he proposed that laws should
be responsive to the unique requirements of a place and should evolve over time to meet
the changing needs of the people.

One of Montesquieu’s most well-known works is his book ‘The Spirit of Laws, ’in which he
expressed his belief in Enlightenment political ideas and advocated for the adaptation of
laws to suit the evolving needs of both individuals and society.

Savigny

Savigny is often credited as the pioneer of the Historical School of Jurisprudence. He argued
that the coherence of a legal system is frequently misunderstood due to a lack of
understanding of its history and origins. According to Savigny, the law is a product of its
time, with its origins rooted in human nature’s predisposition to form societies. It evolves
into various forms based on the influences it encounters.

Savigny believed that the law could not be borrowed from external sources; instead, it
primarily stems from the collective consciousness of the people. He held the view that a
state’s law thrives as its national identity strengthens and withers when national identity
weakens within the state.

Friedmann summarised Savigny’s theory on Historical School of Jurisprudence as follows:

Law Grows Like Language: Law, like language, naturally evolves over time.

• Not Universally Valid: Law cannot have universal applicability or be constructed

solely on rational or eternal principles.
• Sui Generis: Law is unique and has its own national character. It cannot be universally
applied and varies according to the people it governs.
• Discovered, Not Made: Law is discovered based on the consciousness, customs and
beliefs of the people.
Savigny’s concept of “Volksgeist” or “national character” implies that law is the result of the
general consciousness and will of the people. It serves as a caution against hasty legislation
and the introduction of radical, abstract ideas into the legal system unless they align with
the general will of the populace.

Savigny essentially advocated that law should not be created through deliberate legislation
but should naturally arise from the collective consciousness of the people.

However, Savigny’s views faced criticism:

• Charles Allen: Allen argued against Savigny’s notion that law should be based on
customs, asserting that customs are often driven by the interests of powerful ruling
classes rather than the collective consciousness of the people. For example, the
practice of slavery in certain societies was upheld by powerful classes, not a reflection
of common consciousness.
• Prof. Stone: Prof. Stone criticised Savigny for neglecting the effectiveness of
legislation and planned legal and social changes. He believed that Savigny placed too
much emphasis on the consciousness of the people. In some cases, effective
legislation is necessary to bring about significant social change, as seen in India ’s
abolition of Sati and promotion of widow’s remarriage, which were driven by powerful
and effective legislation.

Sir Henry Maine

Sir Henry Maine is recognised as the founder of the English Historical School of Law and he
continued the ideas of the Historical School of Jurisprudence, as established by Savigny and
Montesquieu, in England.

Some of his major works include:

• Ancient Law (1861): This was Maine’s first significant work, which explored the
development of legal systems over time.
 • Village Communities (1871): In this work, Maine delved into the concept of village
communities and their legal and social structures.
• Early History of Institutions (1875): This book examined the historical evolution of
various institutions, including legal ones.
• Dissertations on Early Law and Custom (1883): Maine’s dissertations further
explored the evolution of early legal systems and customs.

Maine had a deep understanding of the Indian legal system because he served as a law
member in the Council of the Governor-General of India from 1861 to 1869. His ideas
incorporated elements from the theories of Savigny and Montesquieu, while avoiding the
abstract and unrealistic aspects of Romanticism.

Unlike Savigny, Maine favoured legislation and the codification of law. He described the
development of law in four stages:

• First Stage: Rulers are believed to act under divine inspiration and laws are made
based on their commands. The king’s judgment is seen as the judgment of God and
the king is an executor of divine judgments rather than a law-maker.
• Second Stage: The king’s commands gradually transform into customary law, which
prevails among the ruler or majority class. Custom takes precedence over the king ’s
authority.
• Third Stage: The knowledge and administration of customs shift to a minority class
due to the weakening of the original law-making power. The ruler is replaced by this
minority class, which gains control over the law.
• Fourth Stage: In the final stage, the law is codified and officially promulgated.

Maine classified societies into two categories:

• Static Societies: These societies do not progress beyond the era of codified laws.
They do not evolve their legal structures further.
 • Progressive Societies: These societies continue to progress beyond the codification
stage. They develop their legal systems using instruments such as legal fiction, equity
and legislation:

Legal Fiction: Legal fiction allows changes in the law to align with societal needs without
altering the letter of the law. However, it can make the law complex and challenging to
understand.

Equity: Maine described equity as a set of rules existing alongside the original civil law,
founded on distinct principles. Equity helps to address rigidity and injustice in the legal
system.

Legislation: According to Maine, legislation is the most effective and desirable method of
legal change. Laws are enacted officially and become operative through legislation.

Georg Friedrich Puchta

Georg Friedrich Puchta was a prominent German jurist who belonged to the Historical School
of Jurisprudence and was a disciple of Savigny. Puchta is often recognised for refining and
enhancing the ideas of Savigny. His focus lay in tracing the development and evolution of
law right from its inception. His primary concern revolved around situations where conflicts
arose between the general will of society and individual will, leading to the emergence of
the state as a means to reconcile these conflicts.

One of the central concepts of Puchta ’s ideas was that “neither the people nor the state
alone can create and formulate laws.” He emphasised that both the state and individuals
contribute to the formation of law.

Puchta’s contributions can be summarised as follows:

 • Two Aspects of Human Will and the Origin of the State: Puchta explored the
duality of human will, highlighting the tension between the general will of society and
the individual will. He argued that the state ’s existence is a result of attempting to
find a middle ground to resolve these conflicts.
• Refinement of Savigny’s Ideas: While Puchta was a disciple of Savigny, he improved
upon Savigny’s views and made them more logically coherent. His contributions built
upon the foundation laid by Savigny, enhancing and refining the concepts of the
Historical School of Jurisprudence.

Conclusion

The Historical School of Jurisprudence, spearheaded by influential thinkers such as Savigny,

Montesquieu and Puchta, has left an indelible mark on legal philosophy. Historical School of
Jurisprudence emphasises the historical and societal context in which laws develop and
evolve. It asserts that laws are not abstract principles but are deeply rooted in the customs,
traditions and consciousness of the people.

Savigny’s concept of “Volksgeist” underscored the importance of the collective will of the
people in shaping the law. Montesquieu highlighted the need for legal adaptation to
changing social and environmental conditions. Puchta’s contributions refined and
rationalised these ideas.

The Historical School of Jurisprudence’s influence extends to recognising the value of

legislation and codification while stressing the ongoing evolution of laws to meet the needs
of a progressing society. In essence, this school has enriched our understanding of law as a
dynamic reflection of the human experience throughout history.

SOCIOLOGICAL SCHOOLS OF JURISPRUDENCE

 The French thinker Auguste Compte is regarded as founding the father of the sociological
school of law.

Meaning of Sociological school of Jurisprudence:

The idea of Sociological School is to establish a relation between Law and society. This school
laid more emphasis on the legal perspective of every problem and every change that take
place in society. Law is a social phenomenon and law has some direct or indirect relation to
society. Sociological School of Jurisprudence focuses on balancing the welfare of state and
individual was realized.

Reasons for the Emergence of the Sociological School:

• Laissez-Faire is the most important reason for the creation of the sociological school of
jurisprudence. It refers to the policy of minimum governmental interference when it comes
to dealing with the economy, the society or the individuals. According to the Britannia
dictionary, “Laissez-faire is the policy of minimum governmental interference in the
economic affairs of individuals and society.”

• It is due to the increasing importance of the practice of Laissez-Faire that this law rose to
existence. However, due to the development and growth of laissez-faire, there seems to
be a greater relevance and focus on individual growth. The Sociological school came out
as a reaction against the laissez-faire because sociological school advocates the balance
between the welfare of the state and individual interest.

• Pragmatists as well as progressives were melioristic in orientation and shared an optimistic

faith in the capacity of the social sciences to help identify justice and the public good, and
the best means to achieve them. The basis of the socio-legal school is formed by the ideas
of pragmatism, which are expressed in the functional and instrumental approach to the
law.
Jurist of the Sociological School of Jurisprudence:

Montesquieu (1689-1755):

Montesquieu was the French philosopher and he paved the way of the sociological school
of jurisprudence. He was of the view that the legal process is somehow influenced by the
social condition of society. He also recognized the importance of history as a means for
understanding the structure of society and explained the importance of studying the history
of society before formulating the law for that society.

In his book ‘The Spirit of Laws’, he wrote: “law should be determined by the characteristics
of a nation so that they should be in relation to the climate of each country, to the quality
of each soul, to its situation and extent, to the principal occupations of the natives, whether
husbandmen, huntsmen or shepherd, they should have relation to the degree of liberty
which the constitution will bear, to the religion of the inhabitants, to their inclinations, riches,
numbers, commerce, manners, and customs.”

Auguste Comte (1786-1857): He is considered to be the founder of the science of

sociology. Comte’s method may be called 'Scientific Positivism'. He pleads for the application
of the scientific method to the science of sociology.

Society is like an organism and it can progress when it is guided by scientific principles. These
principles should be formulated by observation and experience of facts excluding all
metaphysical and other like considerations. The implications of Comte's theory are many.

He greatly influenced the philosophical and scientific thoughts of his time. In the field oflegal
theory, Comte's ideas inspired Durkheim, and who, in his turn, inspired Duguit, a great
sociological jurist.

Herbert Spencer (1820-1903):

Organic Theory of the Society: He gave a scientific exposition of the organic theory of society.
He applied this evolutionary trend of society to sociology. The organic theory has been very
beautifully summarized by Prof. Allen. The inter-dependence of organisms, in its sociological
aspect, means the mutual relation of all members of civilized society and the distribution of
a sense of responsibility far wider than can be comprised within the formula 'Sovereign and
Subject'. It directed attention to the necessity of considering the law in relation to other
social phenomena."

Ihering: (1818-1892):

Ihering was another sociological jurist known for his monumental work ‘spirit of the law’. He
was against the theory of individuals welfare and favours the factor that social interest of
society must have a priority over an individual ’s interest and the purpose of the law is to
protect the interest of society, that is why his theory is known as ‘Jurisprudence of Interest ’
which emphasizes on the sociological aspect of Sociological School of Law. He described the
law in following aspects:

1. Law as a result of Constant Struggle: Ihering pointed out that the social struggle gives
birth to law and the role of law is to harmonize the conflicting interests of individuals for the
purpose of protection of interest of society. He gave importance to living law which develops
with the struggles of society.

2. Law as a means to serve Social Purpose: According to him, the ultimate goal of the law is
to serve a social purpose. It is the duty of the state to promote social interests by avoiding
various clashes between social and individual interests. According to him, “law is coercion
organized in a set form by the state”, which means that he justified coercion by the state for
the purpose of social welfare.

3. Law as one of the means to control society: Law alone is not a means to control society,
there are some other factors also like climate, etc. Like Bentham, Ihering favours the interest
in the achievement of pleasure and avoidance of pain but for the society, that’s the reason
that Ihering theory is also known as the theory of “Social Utilitarianism”.

So, according to the Ihering, the social activities of individuals can be controlled by the state
by means of coercion, reward and duty for achieving social control for the welfare of society.
Friedman said that “Ihering was declared as the father of modern sociological jurisprudence
because of his concept of law as one of the important effective factors to control social
organisms.”

Criticism:

1. He Points Out Only the Problems, and not the Solution.

2. Law Protects 'Will' and not Purpose'.

Eugen Ehrlich (1862-1922):

Eugen Ehrlich was considered as the founder of Sociology of law. Sociology of law is the study
of law from the sociological perspective. Ehrlich considered society as a main source of the
law. And by society, he means “association of men”. Ehrlich had written that “Centre of
gravity of all legal developments is not in legislation or judicial decisions but in society itself.”
He argued that society is the main source of law and better source of law than legislation or
judicial decision.

Law is to be Found in Social Fact: The central point in Ehrlich's (1882-1992) thesis is that
the law of community is to be found in social facts and not in formal sources of law. He says:"
At present as well as at any other time the centre of gravity of legal development lies not in
legislation, nor in juristic science, nor in judicial decision, but in society itself.

'Living Law' is the Facts that Govern Social Life: Ehrlich believed in the spontaneous
evolution of law in the context of existing society. According to him, law originates from
existing institutions of marriage, domestic life, possession, contract, inheritance, etc. They
govern society through living laws. By living laws, he means that extra-legal control which
governs/regulate the social relations of man. In his opinion, the centre of gravity of legal
development in the present times or in the past lies neither with the juristic science, nor in
judicial decisions, but in society itself. His living law is the law which dominates social life
even though it has not been known in the form of enactments or decisions of courts. So, the
scope of living law is under than the statuary law of the state. For example, there may be
some enactments enforced in the sense that courts may apply them in the decisions in any
issue but a community may ignore the enacted laws and lives according to the rules created
by their mutual consent, like dowry system in India.

Criticism:

1. Makes no Distinction Between Legal and Other Social Norms:

Leon Duguit (1859-1928):

Leon Duguit was a French Jurist and leading scholar of Droit Public (Public Law). He was
greatly influenced by the Auguste Comte and Durkheim. He gave the theory of Social
Solidarity which explain the social cooperation between individuals for their need and
existence. Duguit’s theory was based upon Auguste Compte ’s statement that “the only right
which man can possess is the right towards his duty.” Social Solidarity

Social Solidarity is the feeling of oneness. The term ‘Social Solidarity represents the strength,
cohesiveness, collective consciousness and viability of the society. ’Leon Duguit’s Social
Solidarity explain the interdependence of men on his other fellow men. No one can survive
without depending on other men. Hence the social interdependence and cooperation are
very important for human existence.

The objective of the law is to promote Social solidarity between individuals. And Leon Duguit
considered that law as bad law which does not promote social solidarity. Further, he also
said that every man had the right and duty to promote social solidarity. For Example, in India,
the codified laws are followed by everyone. Hence, it promotes Social Solidarity.

Importance of Duguit’s theory:

1. Over emphasis was given on duties rather than rights.

2. The direction towards mutual cooperation among individuals in society.

3. Law as an instrument of social solidarity to promote justice.

Criticism:
1. 'Social Solidarity' a Natural Principle

2. Social Solidarity to be Decided by Judges:

3. He Confuses 'is' with 'Ought'

4. He Overlooked the Growing State Activity

5. Inconsistencies in the Theory: Another weakness of Duguit's theory is its inconsistency at

several places. On the one hand, he expresses faith in the biological evolution of society, and
on the other hand, he vigorously attacks the idea of collective personality. He denied any
personality to state or group distinct from the individuals who constitute it.

Roscoe Pound (1870-1964):

Pound was an American Legal Scholar. His view is that law should be studied in its actual
working and not as it stands in the book. He was one of the most leading and important
jurists who developed American sociological jurisprudence is a systematic manner.

He treated the law as a means of affecting social control and his contribution to
jurisprudence is great. The functional aspect of the law.

Roscoe Pound gave stress on the functional aspect of law. He defines law as containing the
rules, principles, conceptions and standard of conduct as a developed technique of social
engineering. The main function of law is to satisfy the maximum number of people. Not only
this function but also to reconcile the conflict in the interest of individuals and society.
Theory of Social Engineering:

Roscoe Pound gives the theory of Social Engineering in which he compared lawyers with the
Engineers. Engineers are required to use their engineering skill to manufacture new products.
Similarly, social engineers are required to build that type of structure in the society which
provides maximum happiness and minimum friction.

According to Pound, “Law is social engineering which means a balance between the
competing interests in society,” in which applied science is used for resolving individual and
social problems.
Social Engineering is balancing the conflicting interest of Individual and the state with the
help of law. Law is a body of knowledge with the help of law the large part of Social
engineering is carried on. Law is used to solve the conflicting interest and problems in
society.

He mentioned that everybody has its own individual interest and considered it supreme over
all other interest. The objective of the law is to create a balance between the interests of the
people. For Example, Article 19 of the Indian Constitution provides ‘Rights to speech and
expression ’but on the other side, State put some restriction on this right. And when the
conflict arises between Individual right and State’s restriction, then the law comes to play its
part. And solve the conflict between the interests.

He describes that there are various kinds of interests in society and the main task of law is
to make all possible efforts to avoid conflict between them. Thus, courts, legislature,
administrators and jurists must work with a plan and make efforts to balance these three
categories: Public, Private and Social Interests. Interest Theory

Roscoe Pound in his interest theory mentioned the three kinds of interest. To avoid the
overlapping of the interests, he put boundaries and divide the kinds of interests.

Individual/ Private Interest:

These are claims or demands involved from the standpoint of the individual life which
consists of interest of personality, interest in domestic relations and interest of substance.
The individual’s interest is known as private interest like physical integrity, reputation, etc.
and they’re protected by the law of crime, torts and Contract Law, etc.

Domestic relations of a person such as a husband and a wife, parents and children, etc. are
protected by Personal Law. The interests of the property, succession, contractual relations,
testamentary relations, etc. are protected by Property Laws.

Public Interest:

These are the claims or desires asserted by the individual from the standpoint of political life
which means every individual in a society has a responsibility towards each other and to
make the use of things which are open to public use. Main public interest is interest in the
preservation of States. Administration of trust, charitable contracts, protection of the
environment, regulation of public employment, etc. are being protected by the States.

Social Interest:

These are the claims or demands in terms of social life which means to fulfil all the needs of
society as a whole for the proper functioning and maintenance of it. Interest in the
preservation of general peace, health, the security of transaction’s, preserving social
institutions like religion, politics, economic.

Interest in preservation of peace and health.

Preserving social institutions of religion, politics and economics. Preserving certain

prohibiting acts like prostitution, gambling, etc. Conservation of social and natural resources.

General progress including economic, political and cultural areas. E.g.- Freedom of Trade
and Commerce, Speech and Expression, etc. Interest to make a political, physical, social and
economic life to promote personality.

Jural Postulates by Roscoe Pound:

According to Roscoe Pound, every society has certain basic assumptions for proper order
and balance in society. These assumptions are implied and not in expressed form and are
called as Jural Postulates of the legal system of that society. These assumptions of
manrelated to the reference for what they want from the law or legal system or we can say
that it is the expectation of a man from the law. He has mentioned five kinds of jural
postulates:

1. In a civilized society, man must be able to assume that others will not commit any
intentional aggression on him.
2. In a civilized society, man must be able to assume that they must control for beneficial
purposes. E.g.- control on whatever they discover or create by their own labour.

3. In a civilized society, man must be able to assume that those with whom they deal as a
member of societies will act in good faith.

4. In a civilized society, man must be able to assume that the people will act with due care
and will not cast unreasonable risks of injury on others.

5. In a civilized society, man must be able to assume that certain people must restrain from
doing harmful acts under their employment and agencies which are otherwise harmless to
them.

So, these Jural Postulates are a sort of ideal standards which law should pursue in society for
civilized life and with the changes in society, the jural postulates may emerge or originate in
society.

Criminal:

An interest in protection from any intentional aggression. For Example, Assault, Wrongful
restraint, Battery, etc.

Law of Patent: An interest in securing his own created property by his own labour and hard
work. E.g., agricultural land, any music or artistic things.

Contract: The interest in making the contract and getting of reasonable remedy or
compensation when his right violates.

Torts: Protection against Defamation and unreasonable injury caused by the negligent act
of another person.

Strict Liability:
Similarly, in case Ryland Vs. Fletcher Protection of our interest if the injury caused by the
things of another person. It is the duty of other people to keep his/her things with his/her
boundary and should look after that thing to avoid injury to other people.

Criticism:

1. 'Engineering' Nor a Happy Word; 'Engineering' Ignores an Important Part of Law

2. Classification of Interest not Useful

The characteristics of Sociological school of law:

1. Sociological School of Law lays emphasis more on the functional aspect of law rather than
its abstract content.

2. They consider law as a social institution essentially interlinked with other scientists and
the direct impact of the law on society with its formation according to social needs.

3. Sociological School of Law completely neglects positivism i.e., the command of sovereign
and also historical jurisprudence.

4. Sociological jurists describe the perception of the law in different ways like the functional
aspect of law or defining the law in terms of the court’s rulings and decisions with a realistic
approach of law.

5. The sociological jurists have greater concerns when it comes to the functioning and
working of the law rather than the nature of the law.

Sociological Jurisprudence with Indian Perspective:

In India, Sociological Jurisprudence has been adopted in the Indian Constitution. Part III of
The Constitution of India solely deals with the Fundamental Rights of the citizen and people
of this country wherein the citizens and the people are provided with certain rights. These
rights are provided by recognizing the public and private interest of the individual.

Further, there are several cases wherein the concept of Sociological Jurisprudence has been
mentioned and has been taken into consideration while delivering the judgment.

In Ashok Kr Gupta & others vs State of Uttar Pradesh, it was held that this court is not
bound to accept an interpretation which retards the progress or impedes social integration.

In the case of Union of India & Anr v Reghubir Singh, the court observed that the aspect
of the social conduct and experiences of the ages has to be considered while determining
and framing the new laws and norms.

In the State of Madras vs Champakam Dorairajan, the Court held that Article 46, being a
directive principle cannot override the fundamental rights.

In N. Adithayan vs Travancore Devaswon Board and Ors, the observed that distinction
based on cast could not be allowed to permeate in the social fabric of the society. Thus, the
Court reaffirmed its stand that discrimination of any sort, amounting to untouchability would
not be tolerated.

The Court in Bandhowa Mukti Morcha vs Union of India, held that the Court should
abandon the Laissez-Faire approach in the judicial process particularly where it involves a
question of enforcement of fundamental rights and forge new tools, devise a new method
and adopt new strategies for the purpose of making fundamental rights meaningful for the
large masses of people.

In Sarla Mudgal v Union of India, the court embracing the concept of Sociological
Jurisprudence said that marriage celebrated under one personal law cannot be dissolved by
the application of any other law. This observation matches up with the concept of Pound
wherein he said that in case of conflict between interests, the interest of the same plane will
be weighed together.
India has remarkably embraced the concept and principles of Sociological Jurisprudence and
that can be seen by the judgment that is being delivered by the apex Court. Also, different
Statutes has taken into account the theory in a way or other and it can be easily said that
the Sociological Jurisprudence has been widely accepted on the legal frontier of the country.