Law & Society: Unit I - Sociological Perspectives of Law
Law & Society: Unit I - Sociological Perspectives of Law
Sociology of law
The sociology of law (or legal sociology) is often described as a sub-discipline of sociology or an
interdisciplinary approach within legal studies. While some socio-legal scholars see the sociology of
law as “necessarily” belonging to the discipline of sociology, others see it as a field of research caught
up in the disciplinary tensions and competitions between the two established disciplines of law and
sociology. Yet, others regard it neither as a sub-discipline of sociology nor as a branch of legal studies
and, instead, present it as a field of research on its own right within a broader social science tradition.
For example, Roger Cotterrell describes the sociology of law without reference to mainstream
sociology as “the systematic, theoretically grounded, empirical study of law as a set of social practices
or as an aspect or field of social experience”.
Irrespective of whether the sociology of law is defined as a sub-discipline of sociology, an
approach within legal studies, or a field of research in its own right, it remains intellectually dependent
mainly on mainstream sociology, and to lesser extent on other social sciences such as social
anthropology, political science, social policy, criminology and psychology, i.e. it draws on social
theories and employs social scientific methods to study law, legal institutions and legal behaviour.
More specifically, the sociology of law consists of various sociological approaches to the study of
law in society, which empirically examine and theorize the interaction between law and legal
institutions, on the one hand, and other (non-legal) social institutions and social factors, on the other.
Areas of socio-legal inquiry include the social development of legal institutions, forms of social control,
legal regulation, the interaction between legal cultures, the social construction of legal issues, legal
profession, and the relation between law and social change.
The sociology of law also benefits from and occasionally draws on research conducted within
other fields such as comparative law, critical legal studies, jurisprudence, legal theory, law and
economics and law and literature.
Sociological Theories of Law
The two most central founders of sociology, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim developed
elaborate theories of law without which no social theory of law today will be possible. 1. Classical
Sociology and 2. Contemporary sociology.
Law as a product of tradition and culture.
Law is ultimately a product of tradition. Tradition means a belief, principle or way of acting which
people in a particular society or group have continued to follow for a long time. Culture means the way
of life, especially the general customs and beliefs of a particular group of people at a particular time.
The ultimate aim of law is to change the society peacefully, but tradition and culture create hindrance
to it. The following are some of the instances to show how Indian tradition and culture became a
hindrance in recognizing the law or guided the judiciary in interpretation of law;
(a) Family Law and Tradition: Matrimonial problems were wide spread in India and the
same was minimized only after codification of Hindu laws etc.
Fundamental Rights
Art 14
It says that the state shall not deny any person equality before law and equal protection of law in
the territory of India. While this article is general in nature, it forms the bedrock for all other provisions.
The principle of equality adopted in the this article is that “like should be treaded alike”. This is the key
principle for a social welfare state to ensure social and economic equality. The right to equality with out
the capability and the means to avail the benefits equally would be a cruel joke on the weaker sections.
This concept of equality permeates throughout the entire constitution. This article facilitates the
existence of other provisions that might seem discriminatory but are, in fact, not.
Art 15
While article 15(1) prohibits the state from discriminating on the basis of religion, race, case, sex,
or place of birth, art 15(3) allows the state to make special provisions for women and children. This is
important because as espoused by art 14, it is imperative for the state to make laws as per the social
condition of various peoples. Art 15 merely elaborates that same concept and acknowledges that
women need special treatment for their upliftment.
In the case of Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, (AIR 1954), SC held that section 497 of IPC
is valid even though it punishes only the man for adultery and not the woman even if she has abetted
the crime.
Art 16
Art 16 (1) ensures equality in employment in govt. services and art 16(2) explicitly prohibits any
discrimination on the ground of sex among other grounds. Even though art 16 does not directly contain
any provision specifically for women, in the case of State of AP v. P B Vijayakumar (AIR 1995), SC
held that a rule 22A introduced by AP govt. that gave preference to women over men was valid. SC
held that it is not necessary to have a specific provision in art 16 because such a provision can be
made under art 15(3) itself. It further noted that art 15(3) is a recognition of the fact that for centuries
the women of this country are socially and economically handicapped. As a result they are unable to
participate in the socio-economic progress of the country on an equal footing. Thus, making special
provisions for women in employment is an integral aspect of 15(3). This power of art 15(3) is not
whittled down any way in art 16.
Art 21
The courts have interpreted very widely the right to life and personal liberty. In several cases, this
article has come to the rescue of women who have been wronged. In the case of Bodhisatva Gautam
v. Subhra Chakrabarti AIR 1996, SC awarded interim compensation to the rape victim.
Soon after that in the case of Vishaka v. State of Raj, AIR 1997, due to lack of any specific law,
SC gave certain guidelines to prevent sexual harassment of women in workplace.
34 LAW & SOCIETY
Art 23
Prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labor. This has improved the condition of women in
terms of forced prostitution.
Directive Principles of State Policy
Art 39 (a) Urges the state to provides equal right to adequate means of livelihood to men and
women.
Art 39 (d) Equal pay for equal work for both men and women.
In the case of Randhir Singh v. Union of India AIR 1982, SC held that equal pay for equalwork is
a constitutional goal and is capable of being enforced.
Art 39 (e) State should ensure that men, women, and children are not forced into work that is
unsuitable to their age or strength due to economic necessity.
Art 40/Art 243 D provides that 1/3 seats in panchayats shall be reserved for women.
Art 42 says that the state shall make provisions for securing just and humane working conditions
and maternity relief.
Art 44 UCC Due to absence of a uniform civil code, women are routinely exploited in the name of
personal laws promulgated by religions. This fact was known to the makers of constitution and they
urged the states to implement UCC.
In the case of Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, 1995, SC urged the implementation of UCC by
states.
Fundamental Duties
51 A (e) says that it is the duty of the citizens to renounce practices that are derogatory to the
dignity of women.
Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 should be construed harmoniously with the
constitutional goals of removing gender based discrimination and effectuating economic empowerment
of Hindu women.
Acts for the benefit of women
Several Acts have been passed for the improving the condition of women from time to
time.
1. Dowry Prohibition Act 1961
2. Contract Labor Act 1970 as well as Factories Act 1948 provide that women cannot be
employed in the night between 9 PM to 6 AM. Women cannot be required to work more
than 9 hours.
3. Equal Remuneration Act 1976
4. The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act 1986
5. The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act 1987
6. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005
7. Maternity Benefits Act 1961
8. Child Marriage Prohibition Act 1929