Jurisprudence

• It is believed that Romans were the first who started to study what is
law.
• Jurisprudence- Latin word ‘Jurisprudentia’-
• Juris-law
• Prudence-Knowledge- which means it is knowledge of law.
• It covers the whole body of legal principles in the world.
• Bentham is known as Father of Jurisprudence.
• Austin-founder of jurisprudence.
• There is no universal or uniform definition of Jurisprudence since
people have different ideologies and notions throughout the world. It
is a very vast subject.
Definition by Salmond-
• Science of first principle of civil laws. Law consists of rules
recognized and acted upon by law courts.
He divided the law into:-
• General(entire body of law)
• Specific (particular branch of law)
Bentham –divided law into:-
• What law is
• What law ought to be
• Gave the concept of utilitarian Individualism- greatest happiness of
greatest number.
• Theory of Utility- pleasure and pain theory( task of govt. to maximize
pleasure and minimize pain)
• Austin- law is rule made for one intelligent being by another
intelligent being having power over him.
• Law is command of sovereign backed by sanction.
He divided law into-
• Law properly so called
• Law improperly so called.
H L A Hart-book is Concept of law.
• Law is union of primary (impose duty) and secondary(confer power) rules.
• Relationship of law and morality.
• Hans kelson- pure theory of law
• Also known as normative theory.
• Pure theory means it is devoid or which is free from social ,political
influences.
• Grundnorm theory-pyramidical structure . All other norms derive validity
from it as it is known as the starting point of law.
• Savingy – concept of volkgiest( law lies in the popular spirit of people).
Law is like a language, it grows with the growth and strengthens with the
strength of the people and finally dies when nation loses its nationality.
Henry Maine- status to contract
Earlier in ancient times there was the concept of Pater Familia(eldest
member of the family used to make laws. So basically law was governed
by the status.
Progressive – now individuals are governed by the contracts. Individuals
move out and form their contractual relationship. So basically law is
movement from status to contract.
Importance of jurisprudence
 1)jurisprudence helps the judges and the lawyers in ascertaining the true
meaning of the laws passed by the legislatures by providing the rules of
interpretation.
2) The study of jurisprudence helps in rationalizing the thinking of the students
and prepares them for upright civil life.
 3) jurisprudence may also be helpful to legislatures who play a crucial role in the
process of Law making.
4) jurisprudence is also the grammar of law it helps a person to understand the
language and the grammar of law.
5) Jurisprudence also talk about political rights and legal rights and how the
system can strive to balance them out.
 
6)Jurisprudence helps us to know :
-what is law 
-why to study law
-sources of law
-approaches of law.
 7) It covers common topics like property, ownership, punishment, rights, liabilities,
obligations morality, justice etc.
8) Jurisprudence are the theories by the scholars and  they are not derived from any authority
hence it is of universal nature.
9) it is the science of law.
10) It is not set up of rules and regulations or some code.
11) It is the general and theoretical in nature
12) Is not a codified law that's why it does not have any section or
article
 13)Jurisprudence is basically philosophy that gives concepts, ideas
and theories rather than  giving any rules and regulations.
 *Basically Jurisprudence gives theories and concepts only and not any
structure of particular law.
What is law?

Law cannot be static by nature. In order to remain relevant, law has to grow with the development of
society. The result is that the definition of law is ever changing with the change in society. The definition
of law considered satisfactory today might be considered a narrow definition tomorrow. This view has
been put forward my professor keeten.
Nature of law
• Six blindmen define the structure of an elephant one of them by touching the trunk of the elephant said
the elephant is like a python . Second man by touching the tusk and says that the elephant is like a sword.
Third man by touching the ear says that elephant is like a fan. Fourth man touching the leg and says
elephant is like a pillar. Fifth Man by touching the belly and says elephant is like a wall. and the last man
touched the tail narrated it that elephant is like a rope.
• Likewise each and every Jurist define the concept of law in their own view according to their brought up,
their livelihood, their social economic factors, their ideology, their concepts, ideas, views etc. but there is
no exhaustive definition for law which encompasses all the society. hence the law is very difficult to
define, to understand.  thus the concept of law is an interesting field to do research which never stops.
•  Professor Dias said “that the study of Jurisprudence is an opportunity for the lawyer to bring theory and
life into focus, for it concerns human thought in relation to social existence.”
Sources of law
• There are three major sources of law that can be identified in any
modern society are as follows :
1.Legislation
2.Judicial precedents
3.Customs
Legislation

The legislation is considered as the most important source of law .

The term legislation is derived from the Latin word legis which means law and latum means to
make or set. Therefore, the word legislation means the making the law.
•Legislation is the source of law which is included in the declaration of legal rules by a competent
authority. The Legislature is the direct source of law.
•The Legislature frames new laws, revises old laws and repeals existing laws in all countries. It is
the most important source of law making in modern times.
•This not only creates new rules of law but also removes existing inconvenient rules.
Types of legislation :

There is mainly two types of legislation –

• Supreme legislation
• Subordinate legislation.
Supreme Legislation: Supreme law is an expression of the legislative will of the supreme authority in a state.
It is supreme because no authority can modify, amend or control it. It transfers sovereign or supreme
legislative power to the state, and is therefore, unable to be repealed by any other legislative authority.

Example : Acts of parliament and the ordinances and other laws made by the president and governors , is the
example of supreme legislation.

• Subordinate legislation: Subordinate law is that which transfers any authority other than sovereign
legislative power, and is, therefore, dependent on some superior or supreme legislative authority for its
existence or legitimacy. It comes from a subordinate legislature or any authority and is subject to the repeal or
approval of a superior law.

Example : It includes rules, regulations bye- laws , orders, directions, notifications etc . made by various
authorities, municipalities, universities and government departments, supreme and high courts etc.
Judicial Precedents As a source of law

• Judicial precedents is an important source of law , but it’s neither as modern

as legislation nor as it as old as custom
• Precedent means, the judgment or decision of the decision of the court
cited as a right of implied legal principle.
• The doctrine of precedent, also known as stare decisis, which means
standing by judgment, is based on the principle that like cases should be
decided alike . Once a case has been decided by the judge to apply the
principle, when similar facts arising in the future should also be decided by
applying the same principle.
• This does not always save the time and labour of judges, but also maintains
certainty, predictability and uniformity in the applications of law.
• Custom as a source of law :

Custom is the oldest and important source of law. They exist as established usage,
they are nothing but usage and habits. Custom means uniformity of conduct of
people which is followed by any part of community or whole community .
• Requisites of a valid custom:

There is many essential elements of valid Custom which are following-

I. Custom must be ancient : A custom cannot be created in a day. It should be a
long lasting one. Unlike England, where a custom has existed from ancient time . In
India Long usage or observance is sufficient. It may be considered as a valid custom
if it’s ancient or immemorial.
• Custom must be continuous, certain and precise: .The custom must have been
in use continuously , its can’t break by any particular community for a time
period . It is must continuous process and it should not be vague or indefinite. Its
existence must be proved by clear, unambiguous evidence.
• Reasonable – There must be a custom within the limits of reason to be considered
legally binding. Therefore, if it contradicts the principles of justice, equality and
good conscience, the custom will be considered unfair or unreasonable.
• Conformity with Statutory law: No custom however ,old or reasonable can stand
if it is conflict with a statue or legislation or any part of it . Custom can’t infringe
the fundamental rights of any person. If he does so, it will be declared null and
void by the court.
Analytical school of law
• Analytical school of jurisprudence is based on the legal maxim, ‘Ubi
civitas ibi lex’ which signifies ‘where there is State, there will not be
anarchy’ and therefore, the underlying principle of this school is the
relation of law with that of a State. The essential concept of the
Analytical school of jurisprudence is to deal with the law as it already
exists. 
• The key idea behind the analytical school to deal with law as it is, i.e.,
the way it is existing in its present form.
• The Analytical school was dominant in England and therefore also
came to be known as the English school.
Bentham (1748-1832)
• Born in London. He was the son of a wealthy London Attorney.
• He was a talented person having the capacity and acumen of a jurist and a logician.
• He started a new era in the history of legal thought in England.
• The English lawyer John Austin (1790–1859) published a much-simplified version
of Bentham’s philosophy of law, which helped set the agenda for key work in the
twentieth century.
• Austin was inspired by Bentham, and on many points.
• Bentham was opposed to natural theory of law and he co-related law with
sovereignty and utility.
• His main book was-The limits of jurisprudence defined 1782.
• His definition of law is “law is an assemblage of signals, affirmations
of intention conceived or chosen by a sovereign in a State.”
LAISSEZ FAIRE
• He believed that, we must remove the hurdles between human beings
and freedom. Because when every individual will enjoy his freedom,
he himself will start about his own welfare. In other words he meant
‘let the men free’ leading to minimum interference of the state in
economic activities of individuals.
• Bentham in his book ‘limits of jurisprudence defined’ said that its duty of state to
provide maximum happiness and maximum liberty.
• In other words he means to test every laws and keep a check whether they are
providing maximum happiness and liberty, leading to principle of utility i.e.
‘Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number of People’.
• Therefore, keeping the consequences of good and bad in human life the principle
approves or dis-approves action on the basis of pleasure and pain.
• He believed that happiness of social order is to be understood in the objective sense
and it broadly includes satisfaction of certain needs, such as need to be fed, clothed,
housed etc. According to him, happiness changes its significance in the same way
as the meaning also undergoes changes with the changes in societal norms.
• He desired to ensure happiness of the community by attending four major
goal namely,
1.Subsistence
2.Abundance
3.Equality
4.Security for the citizens
• Therefore, the function of law must be to meet these ends in order to provide
subsistence, to provide abundance, to favor equality and to maintain security.
• John Stuart Mill agreed with Bentham view regarding utilitarianism which is
also called the ‘doctrine of hedonism’ or ‘theory of pain & pleasure’.
• In order to measure the pain they advise a calculator known as
‘utilitarian calculus’.
CRITICISM AGAINST BENTHAM
1.He underestimate the need individual discretion and flexibility in the
application of law overestimating the power of the legislature.
2.His theory fails to balance individual interests with the interests of
community.
3.Theory of utilitarianism is that pleasure and pain alone cannot be the
final test of the adequacy of law.
John Austin and his sayings 

• John Austin (1790-1859) worked as a lecturer at the University of

London.
• He used the terms “analytical,” and “positivism,” to describe the
school he formed, therefore, the Analytical school of jurisprudence is
also known as Analytical Legal Positivism. 
• His work namely ‘The Province of Jurisprudence Determined
(1832) advocated a definition of law as a species of command that
tends to separate positive law from morality.
Detailed definition of law by Austin

• When determinate political/human superior

receives habitual obedience from the bulk
of a given society and that determinate
superior is a sovereign in that society and
that society is considered to be political and
independent society.
Austin’s theory can be summed up into the following features:-
1.Command ( by  superior)
2.Duty (imposing duty on political inferior)
3.Sanction
4.Sovereignty
• Duty-obligation to follow
Sanction- the evil which exists or result from non-compliance.
• Coercion to enforce the command and not leaving the citizens free to obey the law but
make him to obey the law.
• It means penalty inflicted for the violation of law.
• Sovereignty-superior ,nobody can interfere. He is the supreme, irresistible,
absolute and uncontrolled authority.
1. obedience must be habitual or permanent
2. Sovereigns must be superior in the society.
3. Superior must be common in the society.
4. Independent of all the imperative control from outside.
There are three exceptions as per Austin which though are not commands but they are still within the
sphere of jurisprudence

• Declaratory or Explanatory Law: which basically explains and interprets the provisions
of already existing provisions of the laws. Austin said that it is not proper to consider
them as commands because they are just made in order to explain those laws which are at
present in force.
• Laws of Repeal:As per Austin, these are not commands rather, they are the laws made in
order to revoke the existing laws.
• Law of imperfect obligation:
• He said that these laws do not have active sanction; they could be law of morality or
international laws.
Law is of two kinds :

• Laws properly so called : are those laws which are commands. only general commands
are included and not particular commands. Which is further divided into-
• (a) Law of God - Laws set by God for men(Divine law)
• (b) Human Laws - Laws set by men for men.
Two kinds of Human laws
(1) Positive Law : These are the laws set by political superiors to political inferior or by
private persons in pursuance of legal rights conferred by political superiors. Only these
laws are the proper subject matter of jurisprudence.
(2) Positive morality: Those laws which are not set by political superiors (set by persons
who are not acting in the capacity or character of political superiors) or by men in
pursuance of legal rights.
Laws improperly so called : are those laws which are not command.
Eg. Which is further divided into-
• Laws by analogy as laws of fashion(mere opinions)
• laws by metaphor i.e. laws of gravity.
• Positive law is the subject matter of jurisprudence : Austin says
that only positive law is the proper subject matter of jurisprudence -
law simply and strictly so called or law set by political superiors to
political inferiors. Jurisprudence is the general science of positive law.
• Sovereign: - Law is the command of sovereign which obliges a person or
persons to a course of conduct. Sovereign means ,such a person who is
superior ,nobody can interfere. He is the supreme, irresistible, absolute
and uncontrolled authority.
• Command :-A command means a wish or desire conceived by a rational
being to another rational being who shall do or forbear .
• Sanction: -Sanction is an evil which will be incurred if a command is
disobeyed and is the means by which a command or duty is enforced. It is
wider sense of punishment.
• Duty: -when the party commanded and threatened is under an obligation
to obey it. It is called duty.
Criticism of Austin’s theory 

1.Sovereignty cannot be considered to be the only source of law.

2.According to Austin, the law is created by the sovereign but he overlooked
the role played by customs and common consciousness of people in the
evolution of law which always regulates the conduct of human beings.
3.He did not accept the judiciary as a law-making agency and neglected its
role in expounding law through the application of precedents.
4.It also ignores the relationship between law and morality as morals
provide strength to law and they are both inseparable from each other.
5.Conventions and international law -ignored
Hans kelson
• Austrian and legal jurist and a philosopher
• Hans Kelsen was born in Prague in 1881 and was a law professor at Vienna University.
• He afterwards relocated to England and, in 1940, to the United States, where he
became a Professor of Law at many American universities.
• He lastly was an emeritus professor of political science at the University of California,
where he developed his Pure Theory of Law in the Twentieth Century.
• He was also the judge of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Austria for ten year
during 1920-1930.After some time he shifted in England .
• Kelsen is the author of a number of books, including the Austrian Constitution (1920),
General Theory of Law and State (1945), The Pure Theory of Law (1934) revised
(1960), Principle of International Law (1952), What is Justice (1957), and others.
Pure theory of law- Features of kelson theory
• This theory is known as pure theory of law because he separates law
from politics, sociology ,history, economic ,psychology ,ethics
etc. .Such approach is usually known as Vienna School with Hans
Kelson its founder.
• It is said that Kelson`s pure theory of law tried to rescue
jurisprudence from vague mysticism and thus it was in a way
revival of john Austin `s 19th century analytical jurisprudence .
• He create a pure science of law devoid of all moral and sociological
considerations.
Law as a normative science

• Law is a ‘normative science,’ according to Kelsen, yet legal norms can be separated from
scientific norms.
• ‘Science,’ according to Kelsen, is a form of knowledge organised around logical principles.
• A norm, according to Kelsen, is a rule that prescribes a specific behaviour. He makes a
distinction between legal and moral rules.
• He said that a moral standard just states “what a person should do or not do,” but a legal
norm states that if a person violates the norm, he would be penalised by the state.
• Law is distinguished from politics, sociology, philosophy, and all other non-legal sciences,
according to him.
• According to Kelsen, an appropriate theory of law must be pure, that is, logically self-
contained and therefore not reliant on extra-legal values, natural law, or any other external
source (such as the sociological, political, economic, or historical influence of law).
Validity of Norm
• NORM is the meaning of an act of will by which certain behaviour is commanded
or permitted, or authorized.
The validity of norms is described as :
• Validity means the specific existence of the norm.
• Validity of a norm means that a norm is binding, and an individual ought to behave
in the manner determined by the norm.
Kelsen captures the following two postulates:
1.Every two norms that ultimately derive their validity from one basic norm belong
to the same legal system.
2.All legal norms of a given legal system ultimately derive their validity from one
basic norm.
• Kelson theory states that it is a normative science which can be
distinguished from scientific norms.
• Kelson limits the scope of jurisprudence by excluding its relation with
social sciences as he separates law from social, political and
psychological aspects.
• Its goal is to free legal science of alien components
Grundnorm
• The Grundnorm:- Kelson`s pure theory of law is based on
pyramidical structure of hierarchy of norms of which derive their
validity from the basic norm it is called Grundnorm .
• The subordinate norms are controlled by norms superior to them in
hierarchical order.
• The process of one norm deriving its power from the norm
immediately superior to it, until it reaches the Grundnorm has been
termed by Kelson as concretization of the legal system thus the system
of norms proceeds from downwards to upwards and finally it closes at
the Grundnorm at the top.
Law will stand on its own.
Normative order
He says that norms are linked in hierarchical order e.g-
• Constitution
• Parliament
• Criminal law
• Crimes defined and penalty prescribed
• Sentencing/execution.
Salient features of Kelsen’s pure theory of law-

(1) the theory is aimed at reducing the confusion and chaos that rises due to the natural
law philosophy.

(2) theory of law deals with the knowledge of what is and not what ought to be

(3) the theory considers law as a normative science distinguishing it from natural
science.

(4) Kelsen’s theory is the theory of norms and is less concerned with the effectiveness of
the legal norms.

(5) it is confined to the system of positive law.

Key Features of Kelsen’s Pure Theory 

• 1. Law as Science- Kelsen tried to present a theory that could be attempted to change Law in science, a theory
that could be understood through logic.
• 2. As a positive law: In the first paragraph of the pure theory of law, Kelsen introduces his theory as a theory of
positive theory. This principle of positive law is then presented by Kelson as a hierarchy of laws that begins with
one basic norm, i.e. Grundnorm ‘, where all other norms are related to each other either being inferior norms.
• 3. Law “As it is”: Kelsen emphasized that analysis should focus on the law ‘as it is’ in fact laid down, not as ‘it
ought to be’.
• 4. Law and morality:  Kelsen’s strict separation of law and morality is an integral part of his pure theory of law.
• 5. The theory of law should be uniform:    According to Kelsen, the theory of law should be applied at all times
and in all places.
• 6. Static Aspect of Law: Kelsey distinguished the static theory of law from the dynamic theory of law. The static
theory of law represented the law as a hierarchy of laws where individual laws were related to each other either
being inferior, the one to other, or superior with respect to each other.
• Norms is a rule forbidding or prescribing a certain behaviour.
• Law is a hierarchy of norms having sanction.
• There might be two norms-legal or morals.
• Only legal norms will be taken into the consideration.
• Suppose democracy being a basic structure –if one effectives the basic
structure then the entire system or grundnorm will collapse
Criticism of Kelson `s pure theory of law

• No sociological foundation in his definition of law-like gay marriages or live in

relationship.
• Grundnorm is vague and confusing
• The purity of norms cannot be maintained
• This theory has lacks practical significance
• Kelson ignored Customs
• Kelson ignored Natural law and Morality.
• International law is the weakest point of Kelson s theory.
• So if constitution is grundnorm according to him then one should realize that the very
foundation of constitution is based on social, political and economic factors.
• Rejected Austin theory that only sovereignty is the source of law.
Introduction:-H.L.A Hart
• He was a one of the greatest jurist of 19th century he belongs to Analytical
school.
• his theory was based on the relationship between law and Society.
• He makes very important modifications in the theories of Austin and Kelson
• H.L.A. Hart:- he was born in England in 1907 .
• He worked as a professor of jurisprudence at Oxford University from
1952-1968
• He rejected the Austin theory of analytical positivism. His legal theory
based on the relationship between law and society .
• His book -The Concept of law
Primary rules
• “Duty Imposing" rules.
• They impose certain specific duties upon the citizens of a state to act
in a certain manner, or they may be subject to certain legal sanctions.
Hart characterizes primary rules as "basic" rules.
• They tell the citizen what one can and cannot do under the law.
Secondary rules
• Secondary rules are not duty-imposing rules.
• They are what Hart calls power-conferring rules.
• They state the manner in which primary rules may be recognized, changed and
adjudicated
• These secondary rules are all concerned with the primary rules themselves. They
specify the ways in which the primary rules may be conclusively ascertained,
introduced, eliminated, varied, and the fact of their violation conclusively
determined.
• Secondary rules are necessary in any reasonably complex society.
• This union of primary and secondary rules captures for Hart the essence of a
legal system
• Hart categorizes secondary rules as either rules of recognition, rules of change, or rules
of adjudication.
• Rules of recognition provide a mechanism for discovering just what is or is not a
legitimate primary rule(checks the validity of law).
• Rules of change are necessary to efficiently allow primary rules to be amended. They
specify how primary rules may be changed. For example Constitution can be amended,
statutes can be repealed or modified by later statutes.
• Rules of adjudication are essential to a legal system of a complex society and are
intended to remedy the inefficiency of a legal system with just primary rules. Rules of
adjudication set criteria for determining when a primary rule has been broken and what
procedure is to be followed when the primary violation has been established. Judges,
commissions, and regulatory agencies are given authority when the occasion is
appropriate to apply secondary rules of adjudication.
Difference between Primary rule and
secondary rule
• Primary rules are rule of first order and secondary rule are rule of
second order.
• Primary rules impose duties, while secondary rules confer powers
either public or private.
• Primary rules are concerned with action which individuals must do or
must not do, while secondary rules are all concerned with primary
rules themselves
• Primary rules are purely Moral rules and secondary rules are purely
legal rules.
Criticism of Austin by HLA Hart
• Law is command of sovereign backed up by sanction but there are
certain laws that are power or individual power conferring laws(gives
power to individual so that their respective wishes can be fulfilled)
like will, marriage, contract, etc.
• Austin theory –sovereignty can not be given unlimited powers.
• Where there is law, then the human conduct becomes just obligatory
and non –optional.
• When political superior receives habitual obedience from the bulk of
the society then that political superior becomes sovereign in the
society.
• King-make orders-laws-(habit of obedience)by the society.
• If king dies –son becomes the next sovereign the there is no concept of
habit of obedience –so there would be no law?
• This breaks the whole notion of Austin having habitual obedience by
the society.
• And also Austin didn’t explain the difference between habit and rule.
• Social habit(park) and social rule(temple) both have –common
behaviour.
• Deviation of social habit however will cause nothing on the other hand
deviation of social rule might lead to criticism, wrong repercussions
etc.
• Hart does believe that law and morality have a very close
relationship.
• Individuals often use moral language in explaining the justification for
obeying the law.
• And public officials use moral language to explain and justify why
they legislate, enforce, and adjudicate the law.
• Harts legal position and his critical morality are consistent with each
other.
• Dias and Hughes- They believed Jurisprudence as any thought or
writing about law rather than a technical exposition of a branch of law
itself. Conclusion- Thus, that Jurisprudence is the study of
fundamental legal principles.
• Ulpian: “Jurisprudence is the observation of things - human and
divine, the knowledge of the just and unjust”.
Law and jurisprudence
• Over the years, the scope of jurisprudence has changed widely, but the distinction
between law and jurisprudence is pretty clear. Jurisprudence is the philosophy of law, but
it does not refer to creating new rules and regulations.
• It reflects over a certain rule or set of legal rules. One can say that there is no agreement
in the scope of jurisprudence. Each scholar says different things. Some have included
moral and religious elements and made it more complicated.
• Several scholars have criticized Austin’s theory. But his definition shows us the difference
between laws and theories. He has set boundaries for the term jurisprudence in a territory
and by a sovereign authority. But other scholars have not preferred this definition.
• In modern times, the scope of jurisprudence refers to human conduct and human order. It
is the study of law, and it is not the law itself – one should understand this basic
difference.
• It has both, the theoretical value as well as practical value at the same time.
• It gives, to general prudent person, the understanding of the nature of law.
• It helps in and makes easy the study of the actual meaning of the law.
• It has educational value.
• It is often denoted as the ‘eye of law’.
• It throws light on the basic ideas and the Fundamental Principles of law in
a given society.
• It helps judges and lawyers in ascertaining the meaning of words and
expressions in statutes.
Relationship of Jurisprudence with other
Social Sciences
• 1. Sociology and Jurisprudence- There is a branch called as Sociological
Jurisprudence. This branch is based on social theories. It is essentially concerned with
the influence of law on the society at large particularly when we talk about social
welfare. The approach from sociological perspective towards law is different from a
lawyer’s perspective. The study of sociology has helped Jurisprudence in its approach.
Behind all legal aspects, there is always something social. However, Sociology of Law
is different from Sociological Jurisprudence.
• 2. Jurisprudence and Psychology- No human science can be described properly
without a thorough knowledge of Human Mind. Hence, Psychology has a close
connection with Jurisprudence. Relationship of Psychology and Law is established in
the branch of Criminological Jurisprudence. Both psychology and jurisprudence are
interested in solving questions such as motive behind a crime, criminal personality,
reasons for crime etc
• Jurisprudence and Economics- Economics studies man’s efforts in satisfying his
wants and producing and distributing wealth. Both Jurisprudence and Economics
are sciences and both aim to regulate lives of the people. Both of them try to
develop the society and improve life of an individual. Karl Marx was a pioneer in
this regard.
• Jurisprudence and History- History studies past events. Development of Law for
administration of justice becomes sound if we know the history and background
of legislations and the way law has evolved. The branch is known as Historical
Jurisprudence.
• Jurisprudence and Politics- In a politically organized society, there are regulations
and laws which lay down authoritatively what a man may and may not do. Thus,
there is a deep connected between politics and Jurisprudence.
Nature and Scope of Jurisprudence
• Nature-
• It gives us knowledge about the basic principles of law like – meaning of right, duty, possession, property, remedies etc.It gives us
knowledge about sources of law. It clears concept of law. It is not a substantive or procedure law. It is a uncodified law, It is a eye of
law. It is science according to Austin, Salmond, Holland but it is not a science according to scholars of historical school, it is a social
science according to historical scholars.
• Scope-
• It speaks of the relationship between the law, culture, man, nature and other social sciences. Jurisprudence denotes a logical and
analytical study of the law. It deals with legal logic, bodies of law and legal frameworks. The subject matter of Jurisprudence holds
much importance in the vast field of Law.
• Jurisprudence binds laws to other fields, such as psychology, politics, economics etc. The scale constantly shifts. It is not derived
from any legislative act or state assembly. Lord Tennyson calls it, Lawless subject of law. Various concepts like Origin of law,
need of the law, the utility of the law are studied by various Jurists. This study of concepts of law is called Jurisprudence.
• Like this jurisprudence includes all concepts of human orders, human conduct in state and society. Connecting on the scope of
jurisprudence, Justice P.B. Mukherjee observed, “Jurisprudence is both an intellectual and idealistic abstraction as well as behaviour
study of a man in society. It includes political, social, economic and cultural idea. It covers the study of man in relation to state and
society.”
• Jurisprudence is a part of history, a part of economics, a part of sociology, a part of ethics and a philosophy of life.
• We can say that scope of jurisprudence is wide & broad.
Jurisprudence and legal theory distinguished:

• Jurisprudence is Knowledge of Law.

• Legal theory comprises philosophy of law and, therefore, it seeks to examine and
analyse the philosophical content of law.
• As rightly pointed out by Fitzgerald, “Jurisprudence covers a wider field of study as
compared to legal theory.
• jurisprudence involves an investigation of law which is of an abstract general and its
theoretical nature while legal Theory on the other hand is an attempt to answer what
is law in order to clarify the most of All legal concepts
• Thus legal theory is only one aspect of jurisprudence which is evaluative and
philosophical study of law in terms of ends, values and goods which law ought to sub
– service. it concerns with living law which is based on felt-needs or social forces and
rejects purely technical, analytical or conceptual perceptions of law.