Inter-caste Marriage: Jurisprudential Analysis

Aastha Gangwal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3624758

2020-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Under the ancient Hindu texts, exogamous and endogamous restrictions apply during the marriage. However, under the present law, prohibition on intercaste marriages are not recognized. But large sections of Hindu Society continue to prohibit inter-caste marriages. This gap between the posited law and the social practices raises pertinent questions: whether social practices can be considered ‘Law’? What characteristics of social practices make them Law?Ehrlich sees formal law as an adjunct of the living law. The norms emanating from the State, and customs, morality, etc. are not distinct as both are obeyed due to social pressure. By applying this idea of law, the prohibition of intercaste marriages should be seen as part of the living law.However, Ehrlich conception of law can be criticized for overemphasizing the importance of living law, and simultaneously denuding formal law of its role in social progress. Also, there remain no objective criteria to ascertain the scope of the law. Ehrlich does not draw a line between law (as traditionally understood) and other norms that influence social life. Kelsen’s pure theory is capable of filling up these theoretical gaps. It better explains the difference between norms emanating from the State and other norms that do not carry legal significance.In this research paper, the researcher analyses intercaste marriages from the perspectives of Ehrlich and Kelsen to understand: whether social practices prohibiting intercaste marriages can be considered law, and under what circumstances, a social practice should be considered law?