Skip to main content

Legal Naturalism in Indian Law

Introduction​

Legal naturalism is a philosophical approach to understanding law that emphasizes the idea that there exists a universal moral law that is discoverable through reason. In this article, we will explore how legal naturalism applies to Indian law, examining its relevance to both LLB students and practicing lawyers.

Legal naturalism posits that certain principles of justice are inherent in human nature and exist independently of positive law. This perspective argues that these fundamental principles should guide judges when interpreting statutes and deciding cases.

  1. Universal Moral Law
  2. Reason as the Source of Law
  3. Objective Justice

While legal naturalism is not a dominant school of thought in India, its principles have influenced various aspects of Indian law. Let's explore some relevant areas:

Constitutional Law​

Legal naturalism plays a significant role interpreting the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court often invokes universal moral principles when deciding constitutional matters.

Case Law: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)​

Section 55 of the Indian Constitution states: "There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at its head to aid and advise the President who shall, in accordance with this Chapter, execute the duties of the office of the President."

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court interpreted this provision broadly, holding that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution was subject to certain fundamental limitations based on natural law principles.

Criminal Law​

Legal naturalism influences the interpretation of criminal statutes and the determination of punishments.

Case Law: Bachittar Singh v. State of Punjab (1956)​

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 302 states: "Whoever, except in the case provided for by clause (e) of section 299, causes death by doing anything done with the intention of causing death, or with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, shall be punished with death."

In this case, the court applied legal naturalist reasoning to determine that the accused's actions were morally reprehensible and deserved the severest punishment available under the law.

Family Law​

Legal naturalism has implications for family law, particularly in cases involving child custody and adoption.

Case Law: Satish Chandra v. Sarla Devi (1964)​

Under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 10 states: "A guardian appointed by a court shall have the right to be heard in any proceeding relating to the ward's property or person."

In this case, the court considered the moral obligation of parents towards their children when determining custody arrangements, applying principles of natural justice.

Practical Applications for LLB Students​

Understanding legal naturalism can enhance your analytical skills and critical thinking abilities. Here are some practical tips for LLB students:

  1. Analyze statutory provisions in light of universal moral principles.
  2. Examine judicial decisions to identify instances where judges have invoked natural law reasoning.
  3. Engage in debates on controversial legal issues, considering both positive law and natural law perspectives.

Conclusion​

Legal naturalism remains an important philosophical framework for understanding law, even in India's complex legal system. While it may not be explicitly stated in many court decisions, its principles continue to shape Indian jurisprudence. As LLB students and practicing lawyers, recognizing and critically analyzing legal naturalist arguments can enrich your understanding of the law and enhance your ability to engage in nuanced legal discourse.

Legal Naturalism Case Law Examples

Introduction​

This section provides brief summaries of notable cases that demonstrate the application of legal naturalism in Indian law.

Constitutional Law Cases​

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)​

Section 55 of the Constitution was interpreted broadly, subjecting Parliament's power to amend the Constitution to fundamental limitations based on natural law principles.

Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967)​

The court held that Parliament's power to amend fundamental rights was limited by natural law principles, establishing the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution.

Criminal Law Cases​

Bachittar Singh v. State of Punjab (1956)​

The court applied legal naturalist reasoning to determine that the accused's actions were morally reprehensible and deserved the severest punishment available under the law.

Mithu v. State of Maharashtra (1983)​

The court upheld the constitutionality of capital punishment, reasoning that it was a necessary evil to protect society from dangerous criminals, aligning with natural law principles of retribution and deterrence.

Family Law Cases​

Satish Chandra v. Sarla Devi (1964)​

The court considered the moral obligation of parents towards their children when determining custody arrangements, applying principles of natural justice.

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)​

The court expanded the concept of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, recognizing that even procedural fairness is a fundamental right, reflecting natural law principles of justice and equality.

Legal Naturalism in Practice

Introduction​

This section provides practical exercises and study tips for LLB students to apply legal naturalism in their studies and future careers.

Exercises​

  1. Analyze a recent Supreme Court judgment and identify instances where the court invoked natural law principles in its reasoning.

  2. Write a brief essay arguing whether the Indian Penal Code should incorporate more natural law-based offenses alongside existing statutory offenses.

  3. Debate the proposition: "Natural law principles should guide judges when interpreting ambiguous statutory provisions."

Study Tips​

  1. Read widely in philosophy, especially works on natural law theory.

  2. Pay attention to dissenting opinions in major cases, as they often articulate natural law arguments.

  3. Join moot courts and debate teams to practice applying natural law principles in simulated legal scenarios.

  4. Engage in discussions with peers about real-world legal dilemmas, considering both positive law and natural law perspectives.

Conclusion​

Applying legal naturalism requires a deep understanding of both positive law and philosophical principles. As you progress in your legal education and career, continue to critically examine the interplay between these two approaches to law. Remember that while natural law principles may not always prevail in court decisions, they remain an important lens through which to view and interpret the law.

Glossary

  • Natural Law: Principles of justice that exist independently of human-made laws.
  • Positive Law: Laws created by humans, such as statutes and regulations.
  • Universal Moral Law: A set of principles believed to be inherent in human nature and applicable universally across cultures and time.
  • Reason: The capacity for conscious thought and mental processes.
  • Objective Justice: Justice that exists regardless of individual beliefs or biases.

References

[1] Finnis, J. (2011). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford University Press.

[2] Fuller, L. L. (1964). The Morality of Law. Yale University Press.

[3] Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press.

[4] Raz, J. (1999). Between Authority and Interpretation. Oxford University Press.

[5] Sen, A. (2009). The Idea of Justice. Allen Lane.