This blog is an amendment to another that I wrote and published on 13 February 2026. One of my readers complained that he had found the article incoherent. Since the gentleman concerned is cultured and because his good opinion is worth having I am doing what he suggested; i.e rewriting the concerned blog.
I’ll start with linking to my earlier blog which was incoherent but it may be better for you to not read it. You might get confused and I am making the same points here.
I’ll start with answering the question posed by the headline.
No, the legal system does not reflect Indian culture.
And I’ll continue with a loose definition of what constitutes Indian culture. It is Manu Smriti for the Hindus and Sharia for the Muslims. The Sikhs also have their own way of life. The Buddhists, Jains, Christians and so on are very small in number compared to the whole population. In any case the Buddhists and Jain culture is similar to the Hindus.
The present legal system was adopted by the Indian Parliament soon after independence and it was – I think – taken lock, stock and barrel from English law.
Now English law is robust and the British are a great nation. I myself am westernised in my outlook and know the merits of the western way of life intimately. It can even be said that I have more in common with the average Englishman than with an Indian who does not speak English.
But was it wise to impose English law on the Indians when they had their own way of life?
Here I will quote Bertrand Russell’s comments on Chinese civilization (written in the 1920s):
… In spite of barbarian invasions, Mongol and Manchu dynasties, and occasional longer or shorter periods of chaos and civil war, the Confucian system survived, bringing with it art, literature and a civilised way of life. It is only in our own day, through contact with the West and with the westernised Japanese, that this system has begun to break down.
A system that has had this extraordinary power of survival must have great merits, and certainly deserves our respect and consideration …
Sceptical Essays : Amazon.in: Books
I think that Russell’s comments above apply almost fully to the Hindu way of life and to Islamic civilization as well.
Just think for two minutes. Whether you like it or not all of these ancient civilizations had survived for millennia without climate change or depletion of the planet’s natural resources, and without genocide or mass murder (for most part). It was a sustainable way of life. And I should think it also gave its people a life satisfying to instinct.
I am not sure if all the comments above apply to Western civilization.
Now. I admit I don’t have an answer to the second question I posed. I don’t know if it was wise to impose the English legal system on the people of India.
Let the nation decide the question if the politicians and the government decide to hold a referendum on the issue.
Maybe English law was the only compromise acceptable to all parties in the 1940s after independence. The country was reeling from communal violence in any case and the leaders must have felt the need for a compromise.
Babasaheb Ambedkar was given the task of framing the legal system and naturally came up with a legal system that gave equality (at least in theory and under law) to the Dalits, OBCs and so on. He came from those communities.
Here is a Google search I did:
what is the total percentage Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras in India’s population
And this was the answer:
Precise, officially verified, country-wide census data on the total percentage of the four Varnas (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras) in India’s population is not available, as India does not publish caste-based population data for the general population. Estimates vary widely, with upper castes often estimated at 15–20% and others largely comprising OBCs, SCs, and STs
Now I admit that Manu Smriti does not believe in equality for all. Quoting from my earlier blog: It is authoritarian, feudal and hierarchical and is based on caste.
So there is not much chance of Manu Smriti being chosen once again as the legal system for Hindus in India if there is a referendum. Given the size of the non upper castes it is foolish to expect anything else.
But the fact that English law does not reflect Indian culture has ill effects on the people of the country on a daily basis.
I can point to my own example. When I was young I was bad natured with a toxic personality. I was rude to my parents and elders. These are actually not serious crimes as per English law.
But some people in high society thought that I had acted against Indian culture and proceeded to punish me for it. As I wrote in one of my earlier blogs I have spent a major part of my adult life in some sort of an open air jail. My getting a mental ailment is directly connected to the way I was treated.
Bertrand Russell expresses this point eloquently:
“It is clear that a society cannot be stable unless there is a general agreement with the spirit as well as the letter of the law; where such agreement does not exist, the laws are likely to be counterproductive and to lead to a general decay of the law-abiding habit.”
Ok. So I think now that I have written a clear enough blog.
I am looking for paid consultancy work. If interested please contact me at nikhil dot gangoli at gmail dot com. Do not use the Contact Me or Comments forms.
I hope you liked my blog. Please share it on WhatsApp, X and FB and let me have your comments. Feedback from my readers keeps me going.