Hindu Law

From thousands of years people living in the Indian subcontinent have been leading their lives by following the
guidelines and concepts given in the Vedas. These guidelines have evolved into rules followed by the people and
enforced by the rulers and have thus become de facto law. In this modern times, the same laws have been
retrofitted to suit present conditions and have been codified in the form of several acts of which the important
ones are - Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956, Hindu Minority and
Guardianship Act 1956, and Hindu Succession Act 1956.

Application of Hindu Law

A precise definition of Hinduism does not exist. Hence, it is impossible to define a fixed criteria for determining
who is a Hindu. So a negative definition of 'who is not a Hindu' is used. Further, in this land, several religions
have been born and they they follow the same customs and practices. So it cannot be said that Hindu Law can
be applied only to people who are Hindus by religion. Due to these reasons, in general, the following people are
considered to be Hindu with respect to application of Hindu Law.
1.

Hindu by Religion - A person who is Hindu, Jain, Bauddha, or Sikh by religion. In Shastri v Muldas SC
AIR 1961, SC has held that various sub sects of Hindus such as Swaminarayan, Satsangis, Arya
Samajis are also Hindus by religion because they follow the same basic concept of Hindu Philosophy.
Converts and Reconverts are also Hindus. SC, in the case of Peerumal v Poonuswami AIR 1971, has
held that a person can be a Hindu if after expressing the intention of becoming a Hindu, follows the
customs of the caste, tribe, or community, and the community accepts him. In Mohandas vs
Dewaswan board AIR 1975, Kerala HC has held that a mere declaration and actions are enough for
becoming a Hindu.

2.

Hindu by Birth - A person who is born of Hindu parents. If only one parent is a Hindu, the person can
be a Hindu if he/she has been raised as a Hindu. In Sapna vs State of kerala, Kerala HC, the son of
Hindu father and Christian mother was held to be a Christian.

3.

Persons who are not Muslim, Christian, Jew, or Parsee by religion.

4.

Persons who are not governed by any other religious law will be governed by Hindu Law.

Origins of Hindu Law

It is believed that Hindu law is a divine law. It was revealed to the people by God through Vedas. Various sages
and ascetics have elaborated and refined the abstract concepts of life explained in the Vedas.

Sources of Hindu Law

Sources of Hindu Law can be divided into two parts - Ancient and Modern.

1. Ancient Sources
Before the codification of Hindu Law, the ancient literature was the only source of the law. These sources can be
divided into four categories:
A. Shruti
Shruti means "what is heard". It is believed that the rishis and munis had reached the height of spirituality where
they were revealed the knowledge of Vedas. Thus, shrutis include the four vedas - rig, yajur, sam, and athrava
along with their brahmanas. The brahmanas are like the apendices to the Vedas. Vedas primarily contain theories
about sacrifices, rituals, and customs. Some people believe that Vedas contain no specific laws, while some
believe that the laws have to be inferred from the complete text of the Vedas. Vedas do refer to certain rights and
duties, forms of marriage, requirement of a son, exclusion of women from inheritance, and partition but these are
not very clearcut laws.
During the vedic period, the society was divided into varns and life was divided into ashramas. The concept of
karma came into existence during this time. A person will get rewarded as per his karma. He can attain salvation
through "knowledge". During this period the varna system became quite strong. Since vedas had a divine origin,
the society was governed as per the theories given in vedas and they are considered to be the fundamental
source of Hindu law. Shrutis basically describe the life of the Vedic people.
The vedic period is assumed to be between 4000 to 1000 BC. During this time, several pre-smriti sutras and
gathas were composed. However, not much is known about them today. It is believed that various rishis and
munis incorporated local customs into Dharma and thus multiple "shakhas" came into existence.
B. Smruti
Smrit means "what is remembered". With smrutis, a systematic study and teaching of Vedas started. Many
sages, from time to time, have written down the concepts given in Vedas. So it can be said that Smrutis are a
written memoir of the knowledge of the sages. Immediately after the Vedic period, a need for the regulation of the

society arose. Thus, the study of vedas and the incorporation of local culture and customs became important. It is
believed that many smrutis were composed in this period and some were reduced into writing, however, not all
are known. The smrutis can be divided into two - Early smritis (Dharmasutras) and Later smritis
(Dharmashastras).
Dharmasutras
The Dharmansutras were written during 800 to 200 BC. They were mostly written in prose form but also contain
verses. It is clear that they were meant to be training manuals of sages for teaching students. They incorporate
the teachings of Vedas with local customs. They generally bear the names of their authors and sometime also
indicate the shakhas to which they belong.
Some of the important sages whose dharmasutras are known are : Gautama, Baudhayan, Apastamba, Harita,
Vashistha, and Vishnu.
They explain the duties of men in various relationship. They do not pretend to be anything other than the work of
mortals based on the teachings of Vedas, and the legal decisions given by those who were acquainted with
Vedas and local customs.
Gautama - He belonged to Sam veda school and deals exclusively with legal and religious matter. He talks about
inheritance, partition, and stridhan.
Baudhayan - He belonged to the Krishna Yajurved school and was probably from Andhra Pradesh. He talks
about marriage, sonship, and inheritance. He also refers to various customs of his region such as marriage to
maternal uncle's daughter.
Apastamba - His sutra is most preserved. He also belonged to Krishna Yajurveda school from Andhra Pradesh.
His language is very clear and forceful. He rejected prajapatya marriage.
Vashistha - He was from North India and followed the Rigveda school. He recognized remarriage of virgin
widows.
Dharmashastras
Dharmashastras were mostly in metrical verses and were based of Dharmasutras. However, they were a lot
more systematic and clear. They dealt with the subject matter in three parts

Aachara : This includes the theories of religious observances,

Vyavahar : This includes the civil law.

Prayaschitta : This deals with penance and expiation.

While early smrutis deal mainly with Aachara and Prayaschitta, later smrutis mainly dealt with Vyavahar. Out of
may dharmashastras, three are most important.
Manusmriti
This is the earliest and most important of all. It is not only defined the way of life in India but is also well know in
Java, Bali, and Sumatra. The name of the real author is not known because the author has written it under the
mythical name of Manu, who is considered to the the first human. This was probably done to increase its
importance due to divine origin. Manusmriti compiles all the laws that were scattered in pre-smriti sutras and
gathas.
He was a brahman protagonist and was particularly harsh on women and sudras. He holds local customs to be
most important. He directs the king to obey the customs but tries to cloak the king with divinity. He gives
importance to the principle of 'danda' which forces everybody to follow the law.
Manusmriti was composed in 200 BC.
There have been several commentaries on this smruti. The main ones are: Kalluka's Manavarthmuktavali,
Meghthithi's Manubhashya, and Govindraja's Manutika.
Yajnavalkya Smriti
Though written after Manusmruti, this is a very important smruti. Its language is very direct and clear. It is also a
lot more logical. He also gives a lot of importance to customs but hold the king to be below the law. He considers
law to be the king of kings and the king to be only an enforcer of the law. He did not deal much with religion and
morality but mostly with civil law. It includes most of the points given in Manusmriti but also differs on many points
such as position of women and sudras. He was more liberal than Manu.
This was composed in around 0 BC.

Vijnaneshwar's commentary 'Mitakshara' on this smruti, is the most important legal treatise followed almost
everywhere in India except in West Bengal and Orissa.
Narada Smriti
Narada was from Nepal and this smriti is well preserved and its complete text is available. This is the only smriti
that does not deal with religion and morality at all but concentrates only on civil law. This is very logical and
precise. In general, it is based on Manusmriti and Yajnavalkya smriti but differ on many points due to changes in
social structure. He also gives a lot of importance to customs.
This was composed in 200 AD.
C. Commentaries and Digest:
After 200 AD, most the of work was done only on the existing material given in Smrutis. The work done to explain
a particular smriti is called a commentary. Commentaries were composed in the period immediately after 200 AD.
Digests were mainly written after that and incorporated and explained material from all the smruitis. As noted
ealier, some of the commentaries were, manubhashya, manutika, and mitakshara. While the most important
digest is Jimutvahan's Dayabhag that is applicable in the Bengal and Orissa area.
Mitakshara literally means 'New Word' and is paramount source of law in all of India. It is also considered
important in Bengal and orissa where it relents only where it differs from dayabhaga. It is a very exhaustive
treaties of law and incorporates and irons out contradicts existing in smritis.
The basic objective of these texts was to gather the scattered material available in preceeding texts and present
a unified view for the benefit of the society. Thus, digests were very logical and to the point in their approach.
Various digests have been composed from 700 to 1700 AD.
D. Customs
Most of the Hindu law is based on customs and practices followed by the people all across the country. Even
smrutis have given importance to customs. They have held customs as transcendent law and have advised the
Kings to give decisions based on customs after due religious consideration. Customs are of four types:
1.

Local Customs - These are the customs that are followed in a given geographical area. In the case of
Subbane vs Nawab, Privy Council observed that a custom gets it force due to the fact that due to its
observation for a long time in a locality, it has obtained the force of law.

2.

Family Customs - These are the customs that are followed by a family from a long time. These are
applicable to families where ever they live. They can be more easily abandoned that other customs. In
the case of Soorendranath vs Heeramonie and Bikal vs Manjura, Privy Council observed that
customs followed by a family have long been recognized as Hindu law.

3.

Caste and Community Customs - These are the customs that are followed by a particular cast or
community. It is binding on the members of that community or caste. By far, this is one of the most
important source of laws. For example, most of the law in Punjab belongs to this type. Custom to marry
brother's widow among the Jats is also of this type.

4.

Guild Customs - These are the customs that are followed by traders.

Requirements for a valid custom

1.

Ancient : Ideally, a custom is valid if it has been followed from hundreds of years. There is no definition
of ancientness, however, 40yrs has been determined to be a ancient enough. A custom cannot come
into existence by agreement. It has to be existing from long before. Thus, a new custom cannot be
recognized. Therefore, a new form of Hindu marriage was not recognized in Tamil Nadu.
In the case of Rajothi vs Selliah, a Self Respecters Cult started a movement under which traditional
ceremonies were substituted with simple ceremonies for marriage that did not involve Shastric rites. HC
held that in modern times, no one is free to create a law or custom, since that is a function of legislature.

2.

Continuous: It is important that the custom is being followed continuously and has not been abandoned.
Thus, a custom may be 400 yrs old but once abandoned, it cannot be revived.

3.

Certain: The custom should be very clear in terms of what it entails. Any amount of vagueness will
cause confusion and thus the custom will be invalid. The one alleging a custom must prove exactly what
it is.

4.

Reasonable: There must be some reasonableness and fairness in the custom. Though what is
reasonable depends on the current time and social values.

5.

Not against morality: It should not be morally wrong or repugnant. For example, a custom to marry one's
granddaughter has been held invalid.
In the case of Chitty vs. Chitty 1894, a custom that permits divorce by mutual consent and by payment
of expenses of marriage by one party to another was held to be not immoral. In the case of
Gopikrishna vs. Mst Jagoo 1936 a custom that dissolves the marriage and permits a wife to remarry
upon abandonment and desertion of husband was held to be not immoral.

6.

Not against public policy: If a custom is against the general good of the society, it is held invalid. For
example, adoption of girl child by nautch girls has been held invalid. In the case of Mathur vs Esa, a
custom among dancing women permitting them to adopt one or more girls was held to be void because
it was against public policy.

7.

Not against any law: If a custom is against any statutory law, it is invalid. Codification of Hindu law has
abrogated most of the customs except the ones that are expressly saved. In the case of Prakash vs
Parmeshwari, it was held that law mean statutory law.

Proof of Custom
The burden of proving a custom is on the person who alleges it. Usually, customs are proved by instances. In the
case of Prakash vs Parmeshwari, it was held that one instance does not prove a custom. However, in the case
of Ujagar vs Jeo, it was held that if a custom has been brought to notice of the court repeated, no further proof is
required.
existence of a custom can also be proved through documentary evidence such as in Riwaz-i-am. Several treaties
exist that detail customary laws of Punjab.
Usage and Custom
The term custom and usage is commonly used in commercial law, but "custom" and "usage" can be
distinguished. A usage is a repetition of acts whereas custom is the law or general rule that arises from such
repetition. A usage may exist without a custom, but a custom cannot arise without a usage accompanying it or
preceding it. Usage derives its authority from the assent of the parties to a transaction and is applicable only to
consensual arrangements. Custom derives its authority from its adoption into the law and is binding regardless of
any acts of assent by the parties. In modern law, however, the two principles are often merged into one by the
courts.

Modern Sources
Hindu law has been greatly influenced by the British rule. While it might seem that the British brought with them
the modern concepts of equity and justice, these concepts existed even in dharamashastras albeit in a different
form. Narada and Katyayana have mentioned the importance of dharma (righteousness) in delivering justice.
However, we did not have a practice of recording the cases and judgments delivered. So it was not possible to
apply stare decisis. This process started from the British rule.
The following are the modern sources of Hindu law:
1. Equity, Justice, and Good conscience
Equity means fairness in dealing. Modern judicial systems greatly rely on being impartial. True justice can only be
delivered through equity and good conscience. In a situation where no rule is given, a sense of 'reasonableness'
must prevail. According to Gautama, in such situation, the decision should be given that is acceptable to at least
ten people who are knowledgeable in shastras. Yagyavalkya has said that where ever there are conflicting rules,
the decision must be based on 'Nyaya'.
This principle has been followed by the privy council while deciding cases.
2. Precedent
The doctrine of stare decisis started in India from the British rule. All cases are now recorded and new cases are
decided based on existing case laws.Today, the judgment of SC is binding on all courts across India and the
judgment of HC is binding on all courts in that state.
3. Legislation
In modern society, this is the only way to bring in new laws. The parliament, in accordance with the needs
society, constitutes new laws. For example, a new way of performing Hindu marriages in Tamil Nadu that got rid
of rituals and priests was rejected by the SC on the basis that new customs cannot be invented. However, TN

later passed an act that recognized these marriages.

Also, most of the Hindu laws have now been codified as mentioned in the beginning.

Critical Comments
In the past, due to the vast size of the country, various kinds of customs prevailed. Further, due to lack of
effective communication, there were several contradictions among the practices and the judgment delivered.
Thus, the country went on the way to being divided. Instead of becoming the law of the land (lex-loci), Hindu Law
became the law of a person. However, this can only be an excuse for the past. Today, because of media and
communication, judgement delivered in one place is felt in another. A practice or custom followed in a village can
be repugnant to people in cities. We must take advantage of this situation and put the country on the course of a
unified law. Instead of being a country of personal laws, we should true have a single law of the land. Time is ripe
for implementing article 44. This will ensure the future unity and integrity of our country.

APPLICATION OF THE ACT:

Prem Singh vs Dulari Bai, AIR 1975 Cal 425: Hindu Law is applicable to all Hindus
who are within the territories of India. It is not necessary that they should be
domiciled in India.
Read more: http://www.lawnotes.in/Domicile#ixzz4IVlEDdCz