THE IDEA OF JUSTICE AND LEGAL PLURALISM IN PERSONAL LAW – A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SEN’S IDEOLOGY

Abstract

Since the first world war there has been revival of interest in the idea of justice and its relation with law and morality. The jurisprudential studies have also helped in understanding this concept. If we look it from the Jurisprudential perspective, we will find that there are many decisions and steps taken by various state which conflicts with the ideas of justice given by various jurisprudential legal philosophers in their work such as HLA Hart , E. Dowrick , Amartya Sen etc. If we talk about a state it can be as diverse as India or as homogenous as North Korea. In case of culturally homogenous countries, it is quite easier to maintain the law, order and justice but when it comes to a culturally diverse country like India, it is very difficult to not get into the conflict with various religions. The idea of justice can differ from one culture to another and one religion to another. Here, comes the importance of the legal pluralism in personal laws. It is the duty and obligation of law to be just and fair .so because of this duty and obligation of law, it becomes important to maintain the checks and balances between the legal plurality in personal laws and the idea of justice. 

This paper is an attempt to understand the conflict with the idea of justice given by Amartya Sen and strike a balance with Amartya Sen ideology of justice and the legal pluralism in personal laws.