Customary Law Vs State Law In Tribal Jurisprudence – Harmony Or Conflict
- IJLLR Journal
- Oct 7
- 1 min read
A.M. Sudheer Vignaraj, R. Anusha & A.M.D. Jegath Balaji, B.A. LL.B., KMC College of Law, Tirupur, India
ABSTRACT
This paper interrogates the complex relationship between customary law and state law in the context of tribal jurisprudence. While tribal communities in India rely on oral traditions, kinship-based norms, and community assemblies to regulate life, the modern state enforces codified law derived from constitutional sovereignty. The coexistence of these two normative orders produces both harmony and conflict. Harmony arises when customs reinforce social cohesion, protect land and environment, or resolve disputes through restorative methods. Conflict emerges when customary rules undermine constitutional guarantees of equality, gender justice, and dignity.Through the lenses of legal pluralism, natural law, positivism, sociological jurisprudence, and anthropological perspectives, this paper explores whether these two systems can be reconciled. Landmark judicial decisions (Madhu Kishwar v. State of Bihar, Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Shakti Vahini v. Union of India) and comparative experiences from South Africa, Nigeria, and Latin America reveal that the future of tribal jurisprudence lies not in absolute supremacy of either system, but in a dialogic and participatory synthesis. Ultimately, this study argues that constitutional morality must prevail without erasing cultural identity. Customary law should be preserved where it reflects community values consistent with human dignity, but reformed or overridden where it perpetuates exclusion or injustice. The way forward lies in anthropological jurisprudence—a jurisprudence that listens to tribal voices while ensuring that no citizen is denied fundamental rights.
Keywords: Customary Law, State Law, Tribal Jurisprudence, Legal Pluralism, Anthropology, Constitutional Morality.
