Role of Law and Judiciary in Social Transformation

Role of Law and Judiciary in Social Transformation in India: A Need for a
Changing Society
Introduction
Every school of law has an underlying tenet or myth, and the myth of sociological jurisprudence is that it
recognises, conciliates, and strikes a balance between conflicting social and private interests in society. 1 However,
the issue is that there is no standard by which one interest may be chosen above another. In addition, no other
school of legal thought can be utilised to explain and speed the process of change that is unavoidable. Indian
society has changed over time from a culture ruled by Smrithi, Sruti, Dharma, and other customary law to a society
that during the colonial period adopted western concepts of law and authority. 2 Moreover, the Constitution is
built on rights and progressive legislation. Indian society has changed since the end of colonialism, including
the codification of religious laws and affirmative action.
At Apollo Bandar in Bombay, a barrister made his homeland-return on January 9, 1915. He never would have
imagined that he would become Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and lead India to victory in one of the worst battles
our nation has ever experienced. From early moderates like Motilal Nehru and Dadabhai Naoroji to radicals like C.
Rajagopalachari, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, or ‘Iron Man’ Sardar Patel, they all had their variations in beliefs and methods
of operation, but what they all shared was that they were all lawyers. Without the selfless and devoted efforts
of
1 O. Chinnappa Reddy, “A Need for a Socialist Jurisprudencea” SCC 4 (1987).
2 Ishwara Bhat P, Law and Social Transformation 83 (Eastern Book Publication 1st Edn. 2009).
https://www.rrjournals.com/ Page |
12
RESEARCH REVIEW International Journal of Multidisciplinary Vol.07 | No.07 | July
2022
these courageous men, we would not have achieved the independence we so much value. This was the first-
ever dynamic transformation in Indian society with many more to come.
By considering the law as a tool of social engineering, it is possible to examine and comprehend the
sociological jurisprudence's contribution to India's social transformation. The significance of researching the
sociology of law in the Indian context has been emphasised by Professor Upendra Baxi.3 The sociological
school of jurisprudence is significant because, when viewed through the prism of this particular school of
thought, it is possible to comprehend how society's responses to the law have shaped how the law has been
created and applied. We might also be able to see instances where society has called for legislation in certain
circumstances. The interaction between the legal system and society advances both of them.
One of the key tools that could affect social transformation has long been considered to be the law. Many
academics have endorsed the idea that the rule of law has unifying potential and can be used to improve social
cohesiveness.,4 as a method for achieving uniformity among a diverse population with sociocultural
differences. Although there are many ways to change and reform society, changing society through the law is
perhaps one of the most efficient and secure ways to do so.
Definition of Law and Social Change

Law
According to Blackstone, “Law is a rule of conduct, prescribed by the supreme power in the State,
commanding which is right and prohibiting what is wrong. Jurisprudentially law consists of rules prescribed
by the society for the governance of human conduct”. Law of any civilized country is not definite, but changes
according to the demand and circumstances of the society. Roger Cotter views “Social change is held to
occur only when social structure - patterns of social relations established social norms and social roles
changes”.
B.N. Cardozo says “Law is a principle or rule of conduct so established as to justify a prediction with reasonable
certainty that it will be enforced by the Courts if its authority is challenged.”
According to Max Weber ‘Law is an order, the validity of which is guaranteed by the probability that deviation
will be met by a physical or psychic sanction by a staff specially empowered to carry out this Sanction”
According to Roscoe Pound, “Law is an authoritative canon of value laid down by the force of politically
organised society.”
Austin defined law as “the Command of the sovereign, having sanction behind it.”
Social Change
Lundberg defines “Social Change refers to any modification in established patterns of inter-human relationship
and standards of conduct.”
Vidya Bhushan and D.R. Sachdeva observed, “Change is the law of nature what is today shall be different
from what it would be tomorrow. The social structure is subject to incessant change … Society is an ever-
changing phenomenon, growing, decaying, renewing and accommodating itself to changing conditions and
suffering vast modifications over time.”
According to Mazumdar, H.T.- “Social change may be defined as a new fashion or mode, either modifying or
replacing the old, in the life of a people, or in the operation of a Society.”
According to Davis, “Social change is meant only for such alterations as occur in social Organisation, that is,
structure and functions of Society.”
3 Baxi Upendra. (1986) Towards a Sociology of Indian Law Satvahan Publication.

4 Fitzpatrick Peter. (2001) Modernism and the Grounds of Law Cambridge University Press.
https://www.rrjournals.com/ Page | 13
2022
M.D. Jenson, “Social change may be defined as modification in ways of doing and thinking of people.”
Anderson and Parker, “Social Change involve alteration in the structure or functioning of social forms or
processes themselves.”
Before we move on to the in-depth analysis, a functional definition of social transformation must be reached.
It's important to distinguish between social change and social transformation for this reason. Social change is
defined as a non-repeatable change in the accepted social norms of behaviour.5 The established social norms,
social roles, and social relationship patterns should ideally shift in order to further develop social
transformation.6 But only a significant social change that affects many people would be considered a social
transformation.7
The transformation in technology, agriculture, dairy, farming, science etc. might not be enclosed within the
term ‘social change.’ Social change is proscribed to alterations in the field of social relationships. Social
relationships are social processes, social patterns and social interactions.
Law and Social transformation

Except for the rule of change, everything changes in this world. This rule does not apply to the life of a nation
or a socio-political system. They are fundamentally live, organic, and dynamic systems. Political, social, and
economic factors are always changing. Social mores and values shift with time, causing new issues and changing
the face of old ones. This shift is not always in a positive direction; there are always going to change that is
unwelcome and generally negative in nature.
That does not appear to be the case based on how law and government have been organised during the last two
centuries. The law, in its broadest meaning, and the entire legal system, with its institutions, rules, procedures, and
remedies, is society’s attempt to manage and direct this transformation process through the state. This logic places
the state and legal institutions at the centre of all social discipline. In theory, the sovereign legal authority, can
legislate on any subject and exert control over any transformation process within the state. Indeed, it is
assumed that legal innovation can effect social change under a highly centralised political system with superior
technology and communication apparatus. 8 The law, according to Roscoe Pound, was a tool for social
engineering. This viewpoint is based on the assumption that social processes are subject to conscious human
control, and that the instrument through which this control is to be achieved is the law.
Theorists of the 19th century emphasised the importance of legislation in explaining social transformation. Henry
Maine explained how society changed by switching from the status to the contract. According to Durkheim,
the kind of law is an indicator of the type of society, and changes in the law are a reflection of the way society
is changing and its nature. Marx perceived the law as an impediment to class struggle and revolutionary social
transformation since it was inextricably linked to capitalist economic relations and thus inevitability, according to
Weber’s typology of law and legal theory.9
Law not only lays down the norms acceptable to a given society, but it also lays down the norms that the
society should adopt in the interest of its welfare. The rules or code of conduct that a society develops by
experience shapes into law for the sake of uniformity, consistency, performance and sanction. An acceptable
norm thus becomes a law. The departure therefrom is condemned as a crime in criminal law but civil law
becomes a code of conduct regulating the society.
5 Supra Note 2 at 14.

6 Roger Cotterrell. (2007) The Sociology of Law: An Introduction Oxford: University Press
7 Singh Yogender. (1993) Social Change in India: Crisis and Resilience South Asia Books.
8 Falk Moore Sally. (1993) Law as a Process: An Anthropological approach Routledge and Kegal Paul, London.
9 L. Roach Anleu Sharyn. (2010) Law and Social Change SAGE: Publication.
2022
Role of law in social transformation
The impact of British colonial rule on Indian society is prominent in any discussion or discourse on social
transformation. British control, Christian Missionaries, and English education all contributed significantly to
the transformation of Indian society. At this point, it’s important to distinguish between the effects of pre-
capitalism colonialism/imperialism and colonialism throughout the capitalist era. Because British colonial
power was founded on the capitalist system, it was able to make fundamental changes to the economic
systems of its colonies, allowing it to expand.
During the colonial period, Anglo-Saxon rules were imposed on Indian society. As a result, Smriti, Sruti, Dharma,
and other forms of customary law have eroded. Though acceptance of personal laws was the colonial
administration’s policy, it was done out of respect for India’s culture and tradition, as well as a conflict-avoidance
mechanism, due to the unexpected application of an alien law. However, with the employment of justice,
equity, and good conscience as a residuary source of law, British law had a backdoor entry into the Indian legal
system.10
Furthermore, many customaries practises could not be proven and were not enforced due to the colonial
court’s stringent standard of proof.11 Another element that has been suggested as a reason for the invasion of
British law into India is the colonial court’s consultation with pundits and maulvis, as well as the severe
implementation of the stare decis. The colonial administration also imposed legal codification in India, both
criminal and civil, based on the Anglo-Saxon paradigm.12 The Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Code
of Civil Procedure, and the Evidence Act are all examples of this. An essential aspect to note here is that all of
these statutes introduced English legal notions into India.
From the perspective of the sociological school of jurisprudence, social change had undoubtedly occurred
during the colonial administration in India, but the situation in which the laws were imposed by the colonial
administration provides a perception of a situation in which positivist jurisprudence could exist. The British
administration could hardly be claimed to have viewed the legislation as an instrument for social engineering
in Indian society. Furthermore, there was little mention of the lack of participation of the people in the
formulation of laws during colonial times.
The colonial legal system cannot be divided into a consensus or conflict model because the people’s participation,
perception, or need was not a major issue for the legal system at the time. However, it is also impossible to
exclude any laws enacted during colonial rule from the scope of sociological jurisprudence. The British
administration was primarily concerned with enacting legislation that would aid in the formation of a pan-
India governance system.13 However, certain laws were enacted as a result of public opinion. 14 This includes issues
such as sati and laws against child marriage. This shows that people’s needs are reflected in public opinion.
It should be emphasised that there has been an alternative stream of social activists since the 19 th century who
wanted things done the opposite way around, i.e., using the lag legislation approach. Some of the more well-
known members of this stream included Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Gopal Krishan Gokhale, and Mahatma
Gandhi.15 They were well aware that political reforms would be futile without social reform; yet, they
preferred that those reforms occur from within rather than being imposed from without. As a result, they made
it their life’s purpose to rouse the people from their slumber and remind them of India’s past splendour.
Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi’s political teacher, believed that education could help in this respect, thus
he established some English schools in Poona with the help of Agarkar and Chiplunkar, and also worked for a
10 Galanter Marc. (1989) Law and Society in Modern India Oxford: University Press, India.
11 Ibid.
12 Supra note 3 at 23
13 Ibidat 24.
14 Supra note 2 at 101.
15 Chandra Bipan (1990) Freedom Struggle Oxford: University Press.
2022
long time in the press, publishing Kesari and Maratha to educate the people. 16 However, in the post-independence
period, the traditions of these leaders were unable to be maintained, and a naive assumption flourished that
social change could be achieved by introducing laws from the top, with no regard for the reality on the
ground.
Abolition of slavery and bonded labour system

The Indian Slavery Act was passed in 1843 to abolish slavery in India, and sections 370, and 371 of the Indian
Penal Code 1860 made it a felony. As part of fundamental rights, India’s constitution protects human
trafficking and forced labour under Article 23. Despite numerous attempts to address the issue of bonded
labour, the Act was the only way to do so effectively.
Abolition of Sati System:

Sati refers to a widow’s life being burned or buried beside her husband’s body. Since ancient times, becoming
a sati has been regarded as a high honour among Hindus. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, an Indian social reformer,
began fighting these practices in 1812. Because the behaviour was deemed part of their rituals and traditions,
society was powerless to stop it. On the 4 th of December 1829, there existed a law that might govern it.
Governor Lord William Bentick legally outlawed the practice in Bengal presidency areas by issuing a rule
proclaiming Sati and the burning or burying of Hindu widows, as illegal and punishable by the criminal
courts.17 Sati was not adequately controlled in post-independence India.
Under the Commission of Sati Act, 1987, the legislature took severe steps by enacting a unique law for the
handling of those who abet Sati, making it exemplarily penalised up to the death sentence.18 It is now a
forgotten system in most parts of India. Due to public opinion, these regulations relating to sati, widow
remarriage, and child marriage were implemented. The laws enacted during colonial rule fell outside the scope
of social jurisprudence. They were only interested in these laws because of social reformers and public
opinion.
Widows Remarriage
Widows were not allowed to remarry in Hindu society to maintain their family’s honour and possessions.
Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar was instrumental in persuading the British to pass legislation permitting Hindu
women to remarry. The Hindu Widow Remarriage Act was passed in 1856. Legalizing Hindu widow
remarriage,19 and offering legal protection against the loss of certain types of inheritance if a Hindu widow
remarries. As a result, it enabled a Hindu widow to continue life.
Prohibition of Child Marriage:

The practice of child marriage was widely accepted in Indian society, even though it was frowned upon by
numerous religious sects. Despite the efforts of many reformers, it was futile until a law was adopted. The
prohibition of the Child Marriage Act 2006 replaced the Hindu Child Marriage Restraint Act. It established a child
marriage prohibition officer and expanded the family court’s authority to rule on the topic under the Act. The
measure also increased the penalty to two years of solitary confinement, a fine of up to Rs 1 lakhs, or both.20
Elimination of Child Labour:

It is a serious crime to prevent a youngster from enjoying his youth. The Factories Act of 1881 was the first of
its type, prohibiting the employment of children under the age of seven, as well as limiting working hours. Many
laws have been enacted, and the most recent is the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986, as amended
in 2016, which prohibits minors under the age of 14 from working.
16 Cotterrell Roger. (1992) Sociology of Law: An Introduction Butterworths London

17 Section 2 of The Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829,
18 Section 4 The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987.
19 Section 1 of the Hindu Widow’s Re-Marriage Act, 1856 .
20 Section 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
2022
Codification of Hindu Law
The codification of Hindu law was one of the initiatives made by the Indian government in the mid-1950s to
further the idea of women's equality and legitimise it in Indian society. 21 Reform of Hindu law was seen as the first
step in this direction. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, 22 the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956, 23 the
Hindu Succession Act of 1956,24 and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 25 are among the codified
laws known as the Hindu code.
The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 made significant reforms, such as removing the need for both husband and
wife to be of the same caste, which was formerly a requirement. Furthermore, the critical idea of monogamy
was included, as well as a consistent provision for the dissolution of marriage. Academic writings have criticised
Hindu law reform for not introducing uniform practises, which are in some ways more procedural and
inflexible than existing practices in some parts of India, but they have largely accepted that Hindu law
codification has led to gradual reform and social transformation in Indian society.26 According to sociological
jurisprudence, the Hindu law reform does not reflect the needs of society, as it was the leaders who were
involved in the nationalist movement and later governed the country who thought of the need for such a
codification and uniform law to be applied to the Hindu community.
Constitution and Social Transformation

India was liberated from political enslavement in 1947. Whether or not independence brought liberty to Indian
society was a point of debate among academicians at the time. According to them, political freedom does not
guarantee social change, and society cannot be liberated without dynamic social change. As a result, the years
1947-1950 might be characterised as a period of “issue development,” a time when issues of national
importance were in their nascent stages. However, it is important to note that India has been experiencing two
parallel revolutions, social and political, since World War I, and the process is still ongoing.27
In a rapidly changing social and economic order, the law must alter to meet the changing requirements of the
moment to serve the national interest. Shrimati Gandhi once said:
“The goal of our Constitution is to achieve social and economic fairness within a framework of liberty. It’s
a character who embraces change, not one who defends the status quo. Future generations cannot be
bound by a live Constitution. If a human institution rejects the future, it will perish. The law must
enable political institutions to be robust and responsive to new events while safeguarding essential ideals.”28
The Constitution of India was enacted on January 26, 1950, to give birth to a new India. Part III of the
Constitution enshrines a set of fundamental rights that provide citizens with specific rights that must be
regulated to bring about sociological change throughout the country. Because Indians had been oppressed for
many years before independence, the Constitution was enacted as a fundamental law that would control the
movement of all other laws in the country.
It is also possible to argue that the Constitution was enacted to accelerate India’s social and material rebirth as
a step toward social change and nation-building. As a result, the Constitution should be interpreted in light of future
generations’ wishes as well as changing social, political, and economic values and demands.29
21 Madhu Kishwar. (1994) “Codified Hindu Law: Myth and Reality” Economic and Political Weekly (29) 2145.
22 The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ACT NO. 25 OF 1955 came into force on 18th May 1955.
23 The Hindu Minority And Guardianship Act, 1956 ACT NO. 32 OF 1956 came into force on 25th August 1956.
24 Hindu Succession Act of 1956 Act 30 of 1956 came into force on 17th June 1956.
25 Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 ACT NO.78 of 1956 came into force on 21st December 1956.
26 See Williams Rina Verma (2006) Postcolonial Politics and Personal Laws: Colonial Legal Legacies and the Indian State, Published to Oxford
Scholarship.
27 Narendra Acharya Dev. (1946) Socialism and National Revolution, Padma publications, Bombay.
28 Dr. Gajendragadkar P.B. (1976) Law, Lawyers and Social Change National Forum of Lawyers and Legal Aid, New Delhi.
29 Kashyap, S. C. (1978) Human Rights and Parliament Metropolitan, New Delhi.
2022
The Supreme Court in Raghunathrao Ganpatrao v. Union of India,30 thus, rightly observed that:
“It’s difficult to believe that our founding fathers, after making enormous sacrifices to achieve certain
objectives, included a clause in the Constitution that allows for the annihilation of those principles. There
is little doubt that as men with experience and strong political understanding, they must have realised that
social, economic, and political changes are unavoidable throughout time and that the Constitution
must be adaptable enough to meet those new demands.”
As Granville Austin said:
“In the first place, the Indian Constitution is one of the most social documents. Fundamental rights and
directive principles arose from the battle for independence, and they were enshrined in the Constitution in the
hope and anticipation that India will one day blossom into a land of true opportunity.”
In his book,31 he claims that no other Constitution in the world has offered as much motivation for reforming
and rebuilding society for the common good as the social justice system. 32 The concept of basic human needs
encompasses a variety of physiological and social factors. It includes the fundamental social requirements of
health, food, shelter, education, and livelihood, and it serves as a foundation for human development and basic
human freedoms. These basic social rights must be viewed as entitlements, both for individuals and for society
as a whole.33
For many years, social challenges such as poverty, discrimination, forced labour, and untouchability have been
deeply established in Indian society. Following the implementation of the Constitution, these social issues
were prioritised for resolution, and India has indeed conquered several social challenges impacting the people
and the country as a whole. The Indian Constitution was primarily created to strike a balance between
individual liberty and the promotion of social justice in the country. Parts III, 34 and IV,35 of the Constitution,
taken together, have been a driving force in bringing about a social revolution in the country, and as a result,
they have established a conscience for the Constitution.
Changes in society as a result of constitutional amendments

The Constitution’s provisions can be amended to accommodate social developments within the framework of the
Constitution. Scholars who believed that a constitutional modification was either essential or desirable also
regarded amendment to achieve that goal. 36 With this in mind, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, the father and major
architect of the Indian Constitution, added Article 368 to the Constitution, which states, “Any provision of this
constitution may be altered by adopting suitable method save by destroying the core structure of the
Constitution.” It responds to the recognition of the need to change the law when the circumstances justify it.
The ability to change the Constitution under Article 368, on the other hand, could not be used to destroy or
emasculate the Constitution's core features.
It is important to note that the Constitution has already been revised 105 th37 times to make it a document that is
relevant in today’s social structure. Furthermore, various constitutional amendments have accompanied a
social upheaval. “Several changes, such as the 1st,38 4th,39 17th,40 24th,41 25th,42 26th,43 29th,44 34th,45 42nd,46 64th47
etc. have
30 AIR 1993 SC 1267
31 Austin Granville. (1999) Working A Democratic Constitution: The Indian Experience Oxford: University Press.
32 Singh Rajkumar. (2011) Contemporary India with Controversial Neighbours Gyan Publishing House.
33 Ibid
34 See Fundamental Rights.
35 See Directive Principles of State Policy.
36 Hamburge Philip A. (1989) “The Constitution's Accommodation of Social Change” Michigan Law Review 88 (2) 239.
37 Came into force on 15th August 2021.
38 Came into force on 18th June 1951.
39 Came into force on 27th April 1955.
40 Came into force on 20th June
1964.
41 Came into force on 5th November 1971.
2022
2022
been carried out in the context of the changing socio-economic situation,” Justice Sikri writes. Through the
first amendment of 1951, Zamindari Abolition Laws were unchallengeable in court and added Article 31-A to
that effect. It also changed Article 15 and provide benefits to the educationally and socially disadvantaged
people. In the first draught of the Constitution, the term ‘secular’ did not appear. Prof. K.T. Shah moved
before the Constituent Assembly on December 3, 1948, that the State, as a secular state, should have no regard
for any religion, creed, or profession of faith, and should maintain absolute neutrality in all matters relating to the
religion of any class of its citizens or other persons in the Union. Even after this debate, the word secular was not
formally included in the Constitution.48
The word ‘secular’ was only introduced to the preamble of our Constitution on December 18 th, 1976, thanks to
the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976. As a result, the term ‘secular state’ can be used to describe a
specific pattern of connection that can be applied to India.49 The social component and people were also
impacted by the change of the right to property from a fundamental right to a constitutional limitation. It was
originally a fundamental right, and the State has the power to put reasonable restrictions on it by law in the
public interest or to protect the interests of any Scheduled Tribe. However, the legislature turned this privilege
into a constitutional limitation by establishing Article 300-A and repealing Articles 19(1)(f), 19(5), and 31 in
the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1978. Similarly, to ensure women’s participation in governance, the
73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments of 1992 established a reservation of seats for women in local bodies
such as Panchayats and Municipalities, laying a strong foundation for their participation in decision-making at
the local level and women’s empowerment in society.50
Furthermore, the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendments) Act of 2019 made another significant
modification by ensuring that reservation of appointments or jobs for economically weaker sections of
citizens, which is a prerequisite for enabling equal standing in modern society. 51 As a result, all of these
modifications assist the Constitution in keeping up with current events and in meeting the demands and
expectations of modern Indian society.
In every democratic country with a codified constitution, the judiciary bears the sole duty for interpreting the
Constitution. The Indian Constitution has entrusted the judiciary with the task of expanding and interpreting
law within the constitutional framework to respond to the evolving society’s expectations and aspirations. The
ancient conventional wisdom held that judges never make law, but simply pronounce it. As a result, they have
not considered ‘strictly so-called’ laws. In the early twentieth century, Britain had a mechanical understanding
of the judicial function. This time-honoured fiction of the judge's declaratory role is no longer popular. The law
must be construed in light of current social norms and public demands.52
Public Interest Litigation and Social Change in India

Any society must experience social change. In India, this is accomplished through the Public Interest
Litigation. An attempt of social change to assess the impact of PIL in Indian society. PIL jurisprudence is
required to comprehend the nature of PIL in India. The state’s formal legal system has become so
disappointed that it is no
42 Came into force on 8th December 1971.

43 Came into force on 28th December 1971.
44 Came into force on 9th June 1972.
45 Came into force on 7th September 1974.
46 3 January, 1 February & 1 April 1977.
47 Came into force on 16th April 1990.
48 Chiriyankandath James. (2000) “Creating a Secular State In a Religious Country: The Debate In The Indian Constituent
Assembly” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 38 (2) 1.

49 Md. Mallick Ayub. (2013) “Contextualizing the Concept of Secularism in India”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science
Invention 2 (51) 39.

50 Sarangi Aparajita & Mishra Gitanjali (2013) “73rd Constitutional Amendment and Women’s Empowerment- An Empirical Study
in Tribal and Non-Tribal Districts, Odisha”, Journal of Rural Development 32 (4) 383, 84
51 By 103rd Constitutional Amendments Parliament insert a new clause (6) in Arts. 15 & 16 respectively.
52 Binod Kumar Roy. (1998) “Role of Judiciary in the Present Day Context” All India Reporter Journal (85) 17.
2022
longer required by law to do justice, and if justice is done by chance, we congratulate ourselves on our good
fortune. In these circumstances, the process of social reform through Public Interest Litigation or Social
Action Litigation is one of the best things that has emerged in the country in recent years.
PIL is a crucial tool for enacting social change. People from all walks of life benefit from its efforts to better
their lives. It belongs to everyone and is only ever used to administer justice. Developing nations like India
profited from the creation of this legal tool. PIL has been employed as a tactic in the fight against societal
evils. It is an institutional effort to help the less fortunate members of society. The Supreme Court in
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India,53 ordered the release of bonded labourers. The court in Murli S.
Dogra v. Union of India,54 prohibited smoking in public places. The Supreme Court issued guidelines for
rehabilitation and compensation for rapes of working women in the landmark case of Delhi Domestic Working
Women’s Forum
v. Union of India.55 In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan,56 the Supreme Court established detailed guidelines
for preventing sexual harassment of working women in the workplace. The researcher in the next point will
discuss some recent judgments of the Supreme Court in concern of social transformation and providing social
justice.
Right to Free and Compulsory Education

From the commencement of the Indian Constitution, the Right to Education was the Directive Principle of
State Policy incorporated in Part IV under Article 45. But the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 1992 declared the
right to free and compulsory education as a fundamental right which directly flows from the “Right to Life
and Personal Liberty” under Art 21 of the constitution. In 2002 parliament took the historical step and
amended the constitution by inserting Article 21A57 to implement the right to free and compulsory education
for every child from 6 to 14 years of age as a fundamental right and also inserted clause (k) of Article 51A 58 as
a fundamental duties of the parent and guardian. In 2009 the parliament enacted “The Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Act 2009” which came into force from 1st April 2010 to provide free and
compulsory education from 1st to 8th standard to every child. This act is a social revolution in Indian society for the
welfare of children. Thus it can be seen that the law protects the life of the children.
Role of the Judiciary as an institution of social change:

Through its liberal and pro-active interpretation of the constitutional provisions, the Supreme Court has been a
crucial institution for social transformation. According to sociological legal theory, the Supreme Court of
India has contributed significantly to social change by making justice accessible to the general public. There
are three traditional roles for the Indian judiciary: adjudication rule 59 and conflict settlement; rule interpretation 60
and inter- organ control; and regulatory functions61 over the legislative and government. According to the
constitution, rule interpretation is the most essential instrument in the hands of the judiciary for bringing and
accelerating social change. With the advent of ‘Judicial Activism’62 in the realm of judicial functions in
modern times, the judiciary may give more liberal and progressive interpretations of constitutional provisions
and this is surely one of the
53 (1984) 3 SCC 161)

54 (2001) 8 SCC 765
55 (1995) 1 SCC 14
56 (1997) 6 SCC 241
57 “The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the
State may, by law, determine.”

58 “who is a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may be, ward between the age of
six and fourteen years.”

59 “An adjudication is a final legal judgement or judgement, but it can also refer to the process of settling a legal issue or claim
through the court or justice system, such as a decree between the defendant and the creditors in the bankruptcy process.”
60 “It is the process of determining the true meaning of a statute's language. The Court is not expected to interpret arbitrarily,
and as a result, certain principles have emerged as a result of the Court’s ongoing work. These ideas are also referred to as
“interpretation rules.”
61 “The Apex Court as the final arbitrator of the law, the Court is responsible for assuring the people of different countries of the
promise of equal justice under the law, as well as serving as the Constitution's custodian and translator.”
62 “Judicial activism is the extended version of the judicial review power to overturn government actions. In general, the phrase is
2022
used to identify undesirable exercises of that power, but there is little agreement on which instances are undesirable.”
2022
mechanisms by which social change can be implemented. The court can also contribute to social
transformation by interpreting old conceptions, which are like broad strokes on a huge canvas, in such a way
that they become relevant to current societal realities.
There are several areas in which the judiciary can act as a catalyst for social change in our country. The
fundamental right to life, accountability in public governance, and social justice with a focus on women and
children are a few of these issues. The judiciary's attitude to growing social identities and conflict has been
analysed in the context of democratic pressures from different segments of the public on the government to
provide goods and services to the people honestly, efficiently, and effectively. New players have also entered
the political scene as a result of the increased public pressure and demand for inclusive growth and change. The
ability of society to challenge the arbitrary use of authority has grown since the concept of public interest
litigation emerged. It also has a tool in the hands of the people to force the Executive to act in areas where
they are required to do so through the judiciary.
The Supreme Court of India has rendered several decisions in various cases that have a large impact on Indian
society. Some of these cases are discussed below:
In I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab,63 the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament could not amend any of the
fundamental rights incorporated in part III of the constitution. The main issue, in this case, was that the
Golaknath family owns about 500 acres of farmland in Jalandhar, Punjab. The state government, however,
cited the Punjab Security and Land Tenants Act, 1953 which said that the Golaknath brothers could only keep
thirty acres apiece, a few acres would be given to tenants, and the remainder would be considered excess. The
Golaknath brothers appealed the ruling in court, and the case was eventually referred to the Supreme Court in
1965. The Golaknath family challenged the 1953 Punjab Act in a petition filed under Article 32, 64 which is a
fundamental right to constitutional remedies. They claimed that the Act violated their constitutional rights to
acquire and keep the property and practise any profession [Article 19 (1) (f) 65 and (g)],66 as well as the fundamental
right to equality and equal protection of rights (Article 14). 67 The question, in this case, was whether the
amendment was a law, as defined by Article 13(2) 68 of the constitution, and whether or not the Fundamental
Rights may be changed. In 1967, the Supreme Court held that the Parliament could not limit any of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by India’s constitution.
Regarding the Supreme Court’s decisions in the Golaknath case, Parliament enacted the 24 th Constitutional
Amendment in 1971, which overruled the decision of the Supreme Court. The Indian Parliament amended the
constitution to state that it has the authority to amend any provision of the constitution, including fundamental
rights. As a result, this case has had a significant impact on society, particularly on the relationship between
the executive and the judiciary.
Regarding the basic structure of the Constitution, the Supreme Court in the State of Madras v. Champakam
Dorairajan,69 held that “the Directive Principle and Fundamental Rights should be in harmony and balance.
The Court also stated that Article 46 is the Directive Principle and cannot be used to override fundamental
rights.”
63 AIR 1967 SC 1643

64 “Individuals have the ability under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution to petition the Supreme Court for justice if they
believe their rights have been “unduly deprived.”
65 “This article was omitted by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act 1978. It guaranteed the Indian citizens a right to acquire,
hold and dispose of property which was not possible due to economic differences.”
66 “This article guarantees any citizen of India to practice any profession or to carry out any occupation, trade or business. This
article is however subjected to Article 19(6) which states the reasons for restriction imposed by the state upon the above right of the
citizens.”
67 “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”
68 “The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in
contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.”

69 AIR 1951 SC 226
2022
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India,70 in this the Supreme Court stated that “judges should avoid
using the laissez-faire71 approach when determining cases involving violations of basic rights and instead use
innovative tools freely and act as “active judges” to preserve citizens’ fundamental rights.”
The Court referenced a Constitution Bench's decision in Union of India & Anr. v. Reghubir Singh,72 in
which it was decided that:
“As are all principles created by man for the management of the social order. The concept of binding
precedent is governed by distinct restrictions, limitations arising from the necessity for re-adjustment in a
changing society, and a re-adjustment of legal norms needed by a changing social environment. This
necessity to adapt the law to changing societal desires emphasises the fact that the life of the law has been
lived, not logically. The law is constantly adopting new principles from life on one end and ‘shedding’ old
ones on the other. The choice is between competing legal propositions rather than the operation of
logic on existing legal propositions, which tends to determine the growth of law. The process of
interpreting the Constitution is ongoing. The concepts engraved therein evolve in response to
changing needs and time.”
In Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India,73 When determining the issue related to ‘marriage,’ the Supreme Court held
that “such matters are handled by personal laws and that one’s personal law cannot be overcome by another’s
personal law. In this case, the Court also followed Pound’s interpretation of sociological jurisprudence, which
states that where there are conflicts among the interests, the interests on a similar level must be weighed together.”
In Ashok Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors,74 The Court’s perspective regarding social change is
heavily influenced by the observations made therein. The case was a challenge to specific respondents’ promotion
within the State of Uttar Pradesh’s Public Works Department. The obiter of the Court complete to justify the
posture it took while defending the destitute and underprivileged is relevant for our analysis, not the
consequence of the case.
The court observed that:
“It is only the Court’s responsibility to provide vitality, blood and flesh, and to balance competing
rights by applying broad and liberal interpretations to the concepts, the language or phrases included
in the live and organic Constitution. Thus, the Court's judicial function is to promote smooth social
change under the rule of law, with a continuity of the past, to fulfil the dominant requirements and
aspirations of the present, through judicial statesmanship and judicial review. This Court has been
given more latitude in interpreting the Constitution than in interpreting other statutes as if it were a
sentry on the qui vive. As a result, this Court is not bound to accept an interpretation that stifles
progress or obstructs social integration; instead, it adopts an interpretation that makes the ideals
enshrined in the Constitution’s Preamble a truism meaningful and living reality to all sections of
society as a whole by making available the rights to social justice and economic empowerment to the
weaker sections, and by preventing injustice to them. With the foregoing in mind, let us analyse
whether the rights of general-category employees violate Article 14, are inconsistent with and
disparaging to the right to equality, and are void ab initio.”
70 (1984) 3 SCC 161)

71 “Laissez-faire is an 18th-century economic doctrine that opposes government intervention in corporate matters. The
underlying premise of laissez-faire, a French word that translates to ‘leave alone (literally, ‘let you do’), is that the less the
government interferes in the economy, the better business and, by extension, society will be. Free-market capitalism relies
heavily on laissez-faire economics.”
72 (1989) 2 SCC 754 at 766
73 AIR 1995 SC 1531
74 (1997) 5 SCC 201
2022
In the case of Shayara Bano v. Union of India,75 The Apex Court by the majority (Justices R.F. Nariman and
U.U. Lalit), held that “It is obvious that this kind of Talaq is manifestly arbitrary in the sense that the marital
connection might be destroyed unpredictably and imaginatively by a Muslim man without any attempt at
reconciliation in order to save it,”. As a result, this type of Talaq must be considered a violation of the
fundamental right guaranteed by Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. In our view, “the (Shariat Application Act)
1937, to that extent as it seeks to recognize and implement Triple Talaq, is in the meaning of the expression
laws in force under Article 13(1) 76 of the constitution and must be set aside and to the extent that it recognises
and enforces Triple Talaq, it is void. Subsequently, we have stated that Section 2, 77 of the 1937 Act is void to
the extent shown above on the narrower ground of it being arbitrary, we do not believe that it is necessary to
investigate the discrimination ground in these cases, as the learned Attorney General and those who support
him have suggested.”
Taking into account the arguments of various religious groups and aggrieved petitioners, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, by a 3:2 majority, declared “the practice of Triple Talaq, or Talaq-e- Biddat, unconstitutional and arbitrary in
nature. The Hon’ble Court also directed the Government of Union of India to consider the views expressed by
the court in the Judgment and draught a proper legislative framework to regulate the practice of divorce in Muslim
communities.”
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v. Union of India,78 In this landmark judgment, a 9-judges bench of the
Supreme Court upheld “the right to privacy as a fundamental right derived from Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution. The right to privacy is an essential and integral part of the Constitution, which protects
fundamental rights. The key point of contention in this area is between an individual’s right to privacy and the
government’s legitimate goal of enforcing its regulations, and a balance must be maintained while continuing
to do so.”
In Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India,79 a constitution of the Supreme Court
comprising (Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A K Sikri, A. M. Khanvilkar, D Y Chandrachud and
Ashok Bhushan) held that the right to a dignified death is a fundamental right. The right to execute advance
medical directives is a statement of a person’s right to bodily integrity and self-determination that is
independent of any state acknowledgement or regulation.
The Court said that:
“the right to live with dignity also includes the smoothening of the process of dying in case of a terminally
ill patient or a person in PVS with no hope of recovery. A failure to legally recognize advance
medical directives may amount to non-facilitation of the right to smoothen the dying process and the
right to live with dignity.”
In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India,80 the Supreme Court unanimously held that “section 377 81 of the
Indian Penal Code is unconstitutional because it violates fundamental rights incorporated under Articles 14,
15, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, the Apex Court overruled the decision in Suresh
Kumar
75 (2017) 9 SCC 1
76 “All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are
inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void”
77 “Notwithstanding any custom or usage to the contrary, in all questions (save questions relating to agricultural land) regarding
intestate succession, special property of females, including personal properly inherited or obtained under contract or gift or any
other provision of Personal Law. marriage, dissolution of marriage, including talaq, ila, zihar, lian, khula and mubarat, maintenance,
dower, guardianship, gifts, trusts and trust properties, and wakfs (other than charities and charitable institutions and charitable
and religious endowments) the rule of decision in cases where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)”
78 (2017) 10 SCC 1
79 (2018) 5 SCC 1
80 (2018) 10 SCC 1
81 “Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished
with [imprisonment for life], or with impris•onment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine.”
2022
Koushal and others v. Naz Foundation and others.82 It further stated that section 377 of IPC will only
apply to non-consensual sexual happenings done against adults or minors.”
In the case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India,83 the Supreme Court also decided “on the constitutional
legality of Section 49784 of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalised adultery.” The court stated that “any
system that treats a woman with indignity, unfairness, inequality, or discrimination invokes the wrath of the
Constitution,” and that Sections 49785 IPC and 198(2)86 CrPC are in violation of Articles 14, 15 (1), and 21 of
the Indian Constitution, and so ultra vires the Constitution.
The 3- judge bench of the Supreme Court in Shakti Vahini v. Union of India,87 held that consent of any
person is not required for a marriage between two consenting adults. It was decided that any action taken by
the Khap Panchayat or family members to prevent two consenting adults from marrying is unlawful. the Court
further stated, “Class honour, however, conceived, cannot suffocate an individual’s right to choose as
guaranteed by our Constitution,”. It was declared illegal to commit any form of honour-based crime with the
goal of suppressing a person’s choice of love marriage. This would be a violation of his dignity, which is
prohibited by Indian Constitutional Article 21. The Court decided that when two adults marry of their own free
will, they have the right to select their relationship under the Constitution. As a result, any violation of this
right is a violation of the Constitution. Furthermore, the Court delineated the many reasons for these crimes
and the fact that such violent crimes are primarily committed against women. According to the Court, the
crime of honour killing is also a violation of an individual’s Fundamental Rights, as addressed by various
institutes around the world.
Shafin Jahan v. K.M. Ashokan,88 in this case, the Supreme Court overruled a Kerala High Court decision
declaring Hadiya and Shafin Jahan's marriage null and void. The Supreme Court upheld “the marriage, ruling that
the NIA's investigation into the marriage and any other criminality should continue, but that there should be
no interference with the marriage. The ruling was delivered by a three-judge bench consisting of Chief Justice
Deepak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, and Justice DY Chandrachud, and Hadiya was removed from her parents
custody against her will. After she declared her desire to continue her education, the judge ordered her to
return to college.”
The constitution of India provides liberty and freedom of choice to every individual. In the case of Lata Singh
v. State of Uttar Pradesh,89 it was observed by the Supreme Court that “the right to marry is a component of
the Right to life enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court further held that India is a
free and democratic country and a person is free to marry whosoever he/she likes after attaining the age of
majority which is 21 for boys and 18 for girls. Parents of the boy or girl do not have any right to harass or
instigate acts of violence against them. Therefore, we can say that a person can marry whomsoever he/she
likes irrespectively of the caste and it is the fundamental right to marry guaranteed under the constitution of
India.”
The Supreme Court in Laxmibai Chandaragi v. The State of Karnataka,90 observed that educated younger
boys and girls are choosing their life partners, which is contrary to societal standards. When two mature
persons
82 (2014) 1 SCC 1
83 (2018) 2 SCC 189
84 “Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another
man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of
the offence of adultery and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or
with fine, or with both. In such a case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.”
85 Ibid
86 “For the purposes of sub-section (1), no person other than the husband of the woman shall be deemed to be aggrieved by an
offence punishable under section 497 or section 498 of the said Code: Provided that in the absence of the husband, some person
who had the care of the woman on his behalf at the time when such offence was committed may, with the leave of the Court,
make a complaint on his behalf.”
87 (2018) 7 SCC 192
88 (2018) 16 SCC 368
89 (2006) 5 SCC 475)
90 (2021) 3 SCC 360 2022
2022
choose to marry, the consensus of their family, community, or society is not required, and their consent must
be given priority.
In this case, Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala,91 the Supreme Court with the majority
ruled that Rule 3(b)92 violates the Constitution, Section 393 of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship
(Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965, and Section 494 of the 1965 Act, which states that the
regulations/rules enacted in this act shall not discriminate at all way against any Hindu on the base of his/her
membership in a specific section or class. The Supreme Court considered this prohibition as “hegemonic
patriarchy” (hegemonic patriarchy means that patriarchy has become such an overarching concept that
discrimination based on it seems to be common sense to the point that not only males but also women become
supporters and perpetrators of the discriminatory concept).
It stated that discrimination based on biological and physiological characteristics such as menstruation was
unconstitutional. It amounted to inequality based on a biological trait unique to men and women. It was an affront
to women’s rights to equality and dignity. According to the Supreme Court, a ban into the temple based on the
belief that menstruation women are “polluted and impure” is a type of untouchability, because purity and
pollution stigmatised women. The Apex Court further held that Ayyappa followers do not create a separate
religion solely because of their devoutness to Lord Ayyappa, but slightly as part of Hindu worship.95
The Supreme Court overruled a 1951 Bombay High Court decision in the case of State of Bombay v. Narasu
Appa Mali,96 which concluded that personal law is not ‘law’ or ‘law in force’ under Article 13 and that
immunising customs takes away the constitution's priority. Customs and personal law have a profound impact
on people’s civil status, and no customs or usages can entitlement the sovereignty over the Constitution and its
vision of protecting the sanctity of self-respect, liberty, and equality.
Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma,97 In this case, the Supreme Court Bench referred to many Hindu law
doctrines, both statutory and customary, such as Coparcenary and Joint Hindu Family, unobstructed and
obstructed legacy and a catena of judgments. Following an examination of these factors, the Court declared
joint
91 (2019) 11 SCC 1
92 The Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorization of Entry Rules, 1965 (Rules 1965) states that
“Women at such time during which they are not by custom and usage allowed to enter a place of worship” was the basis of the
practice of excluding women of the age group of 10 through to 50 years to enter the temple.
93 Places of public worship to be open to all sections and classes of Hindus: “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary
contained in any other law for the time being in force or any custom or usage or any instrument having effect by virtue of any
such law or any decree or order of the court, every place of public worship which is open to Hindus generally or to any section
or class thereof, shall be open to all sections and classes of Hindus; and no Hindu of whatsoever section or class shall, in any
manner, be prevented, obstructed or discouraged from entering such place of public worship, or from worshipping or offering
prayers thereat, or performing, any religious service therein, in the like manner and to the like extent as any other Hindu of
whatsoever section or class may so enter, worship, pray or perform.”
“Provided that in the case of a place of public worship which is a temple founded for the benefit of any religious denomination
or section thereof, the provisions of this section shall be subject to the right of that religious denomination or section, as the
case may be, to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.”
94 Power to make regulations for the maintenance of order and decorum and the due performance of rites and
ceremonies in place of public worship. – “(1) The trustee or any other person in charge of any place of public worship shall
have power, subject to the control of the competent authority and any rules which may be made by that authority, to make
regulations for the maintenance of order and decorum in the place of public worship and the due observance of the religious
rites and ceremonies performed therein”
“Provided that no regulation made under this sub-section shall discriminate in any manner whatsoever, against any Hindu on the
ground that he belongs to a particular section or class.”
(2) The competent authority referred to in sub-section (1) shall be;
“(i) in relation to a place of public worship situated in any area to which Part I of the Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious
Institutions Act, 1950 (Travancore-Cochin Act XV of 1950), extends, the Travancore Devaswom Board”
“(ii) in relation to a place of public worship situated in any area to which Part II of the said Act extends, the Cochin Devaswom
Board” and
“(iii) in relation to a place of public worship situated in any other area in the State of Kerala, the Government.”
95 Ibid
96 AIR 1952 Bom 84
97 (2020) 9 SCC 1
2022
Hindu family property to be an unencumbered legacy. The right of partition is absolute in this type of
property, and it is given to a person by virtue of his or her birth. Separate property, on the other hand, is an
obstructed heritage, in which the right to ownership and partition is impeded by the death of the separate
property owner. An obstructed heritage right is based on the death of the original owner, not on birth. The
Supreme Court concluded “that because the right to partition is based on the birth of a daughter (unobstructed
heritage), it makes no difference whether the father coparcener was alive or deceased at the time of the
amendment was implemented.” As a result, the Court reversed the verdict in Phulavati v. Prakash,98 the
Court stated that coparcenary rights transfer from the father to his surviving daughter, rather than from a
“living coparcener to living daughter.”
A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court ruled that “the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act
2005 provides coparcener status to the daughters born before or after this Amendment, with the same rights
and duties as sons. It also held that the coparcener’s right is based on the birth and no need for the father
coparcener did not have to be alive on November 9, 2005, when the amended law took effect.”
Conclusion
The researcher comes to the conclusion that societal problems are interconnected rather than isolated, and that
the law serves as a mirror for understanding how individuals are connected to one another. The effectiveness
of law and other devices for social transformation should be coordinated with India’s social and cultural life.
It is unavoidable to transform a social structure in accordance with the needs of the times and the people’s
modes and mores. An outstanding balance between the instrumentality of law and people’s folkways and
mores would cover the path for actual justice in action, resulting in societal empowerment.
There are several agencies and options in India that can contribute their strength to solving this annoying problem
if they so desire, but the fact remains that they do not wish to democratize and equalize Indian society in
accordance with the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity incorporated in the preamble of the Indian
Constitution. As a result, it was thought that the law and the Judiciary could be used as a tool for social
change. Almost 25 social legislations have been enacted, mostly to abolish i.e., (untouchability and caste-based
disabilities, widow remarriage, abolition of the slavery system, abolition of bonded labour etc.) and these
legislations have proven to be quite effective in relieving, if not totally eliminating, the grave problem of
untouchability and caste- based disabilities and other means.
In various aforementioned cases, the judiciary has acted as a synergist for social change by adopting a position that
fairly advances people’s rights. It has acted in public interest litigation, with the welfare of the people and
society in mind, and this has sparked progressive social transformation. It aids in the protection and
safeguarding of people’s rights, identifies areas where reform is required and works toward the establishment
of a stable, progressive society. It is a powerful organisation that strives to improve people’s lives by acting as a
substance for social change.
98 (2016) 2 SCC 36
View publication stats

Role of Law and Judiciary in Social Transformation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Role of Law and Judiciary in Social Transformation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Role of Law and Judiciary in Social Transformation in India: A Need for a

Definition of Law and Social Change

3 Baxi Upendra. (1986) Towards a Sociology of Indian Law Satvahan Publication.

Law and Social transformation

5 Supra Note 2 at 14.

Abolition of slavery and bonded labour system

Abolition of Sati System:

Prohibition of Child Marriage:

Elimination of Child Labour:

16 Cotterrell Roger. (1992) Sociology of Law: An Introduction Butterworths London

Constitution and Social Transformation

As Granville Austin said:

Changes in society as a result of constitutional amendments

Public Interest Litigation and Social Change in India

42 Came into force on 8th December 1971.

Assembly” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 38 (2) 1.

Invention 2 (51) 39.

Right to Free and Compulsory Education

Role of the Judiciary as an institution of social change:

53 (1984) 3 SCC 161)

State may, by law, determine.”

six and fourteen years.”

63 AIR 1967 SC 1643

contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.”

The court observed that:

70 (1984) 3 SCC 161)

The Court said that:

View publication stats

You might also like