INTRODUCTION

“Research is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose.”

-- Zora Neale1

The expression ‘research’ is derived from the French word ‘recherché’, which means
‘thorough inspection’. Research, if we delve into the word literally, has prefix “re” to the
word “search” which would mean doing the search again or finding the answers again. Thus,
the word “research” essentially means repeated search for something, to find out different and
new aspects, facets or ideas or things or some special knowledge in the existing facts.

Legal research, therefor, is essentially a systematic study of legal theories, concept, doctrine,
cases, principles, rules and regulations etc., following a specific methodology in which it
should be carried out. Legal research is an integral aspect of understanding, interpreting, and
developing law for law being an ever evolving and emerging subject.

Legal research has been described as finding the Law that governs an activity and materials
that explain or analyse that Law. The legal analysis includes various processes ranging from
gathering information to analysing a problem's facts and communicating the investigation
results. Legal research is about more than just technical knowledge of the Law. Instead, its
objective is to find out rational or policy arguments in Law. It goes beyond description and
requires analysis. In this sense, it is a creative process and involves normative activities. It is
a diligent and continued search for the more probable accepted answer to a legal question. 2 In
essence, it involves analysing facts, legal propositions and doctrines and applying legal
reasoning to conclusions.3

When it comes to methodology for legal research, two major approaches have broadly shaped
the landscape of legal inquiry:

1. Doctrinal Research
2. Non-doctrinal Research.

1
https://sites.nicholas.duke.edu/superfund/poking-and-prying-with-a-purpose/
2
Rita Abhavan Ngwoke, Ibiene P Mbano and Oriaifo Helynn, A critical appraisal of doctrinal and Non-doctrinal
legal research methodologies in contemporary times, CIVIL LAW JOURNAL,
https://www.civillawjournal.com/article/38/3-1-1-747.pdf, published on 08.11.2022, last accessed on
03.10.2024
3
Bhat, P. Ishwara. Idea and Methods of Legal Research. Oxford University Press, 2019.

1
In an era of increasingly complex legal questions and global challenges, understanding the
complementary nature of doctrinal and non-doctrinal research is critical. This paper explores
the significance of doctrinal and non-doctrinal research. It examines the contributions and
limitations of both approaches while arguing that a synthesis of these methods is essential for
holistic legal scholarship.

However, the essential task of a legal researcher can go beyond only legal matters i.e.,
studying its principles, theories, process, historical development, and comparative status,
among other matters (Doctrinal Legal Research) but to study related practical issues of the
society and the world generally in connection to Law (non-doctrinal legal research). And
thus, herein this paper, we shall examine and analyse the significance of doctrinal versus non-
doctrinal legal research methodology critically.

DOCTRINAL RESEARCH
Doctrinal research, often referred to as the "traditional" method, is primarily concerned with a
close reading and analysis of legal texts, case law, and precedents. It is predominantly
analytical, with researchers engaging in legal reasoning to interpret, clarify, and systematize
existing law.

Definitions:

1. Prof. S. N. Jain observed, “Doctrinal research involves analysis of case law,

arranging, ordering, and systematising legal propositions, and study of legal
institutions through legal reasoning or rational deduction”4
2. According to Dr. S.R. Myneni, “doctrinal research means research that has been
carried out on a legal proposition or propositions by way of analysing the existing
statutory provisions and cases by applying the reasoning power.”
3. Ian Dobinson and Francis Johns, "Doctrinal or theoretical legal research can be
defined as research which asks what the Law is in a particular area. It is concerned
with the legal doctrine's analysis, development and application. This type of research
is also known as pure theoretical research.5 It consists of either simple research

4
S.N.Jain, Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal Legal Research, 14 J ILI 487 (1972)
5
Holmes OW. ‘The path of the law’, Harvard Law Review. 1997;110(5):991-1009.

2
 directed at finding a specific statement of the Law or a more complex and in-depth
analysis of legal reasoning.6

Doctrinal research asks, what is the law in a particular case. It is concerned with the
analysis of the legal doctrine and how it was developed and applied. As is well known,
this is purely theoretical research that consists of either simple research aimed at finding a
specific statement of the law, or it is legal analysis with more complex logic and depth. In
short, it is library-based research that seeks to find the "one right answer" to certain legal
issues or question after thorough analysis of the texts available such as legal doctrines,
rules, and principles developed through legislation, case law, and regulation. Thus, the
aim of this type of methodology is to make specific inquiries in order to identify specific
pieces of information.

Steps involved in Doctrinal Research7:

1. Analysis of legal issues in order to determine the need for further research.
2. Thorough reading on a subject using sources such as dictionaries, encyclopaedias,
major textbooks, treatises, and journals that are accompanied by footnotes.
3. Reading of opinions of jurist, case laws etc to understand the evolution of any law
and its application at the present times, understanding the legal concepts and legal
principles.
4. After analysing the legal sources, the legal concepts and principles are synthesized
by interpretation so as to frame a rational, logical, and coherent understanding of
the legal issue.
5. After synthesising, the said legal rationale is applied to the previously analysed
and synthesised legal problem so as to finally arrive at a conclusion.

Doctrinal research involves the systematic study of the written law, focussing on the
systematic analysis of legal texts, such as statutes, case law, and legal principles. This
type of research is often used by judges, legal practitioners, and scholars who need a
deep understanding of specific areas of law.

6
Dobinson I. & Francis J., Qualitative Legal Research, (Michael McConville& Wing Hong Chui eds., 2007).
7
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316895684_Legal_Research_of_Doctrinal_and_Non-Doctrinal

3
NON-DOCTRINAL RESEARCH
Non-doctrinal research, often called empirical or socio-legal research, explores the law’s
impact on society and how society influences the law. It focuses on law in action rather than
law in books. This type of research uses methodologies from other disciplines, such as
sociology, economics, political science, and anthropology, to understand how legal rules
function in practice by investigating the broader socio-economic, political, and cultural
factors that shape legal systems and the implementation of laws.

This form of research involves gathering empirical data through surveys, interviews, case
studies, and statistical analysis to understand how laws affect individuals, communities, and
institutions.

Definitions:

1. Dr. Avtar Singh, defines "Non-doctrinal research is concerned with studying how law
and legal institutions affect human behaviour and how social forces shape law."8
2. S.N. Jain, describes non-doctrinal legal research as "Non-doctrinal legal research is
concerned with the social, economic, political, and other contextual aspects of law. It
focuses on law in action, rather than law in books."9
3. Julius Stone, explains non-doctrinal research as "Non-doctrinal legal research is
empirical and investigates the actual working of law, encompassing a wider spectrum
of interdisciplinary fields like sociology, politics, and economics."10
4. Mark Tushnet, an American legal scholar, describes “Non-doctrinal legal research
examines how law is practiced, the impact it has on society, and how external factors
like politics and economy shape it."11

B. Steps involved in Non-Doctrinal Research

Non-doctrinal legal research focuses on field research. It is based on first-hand information.

The information in this research was collected by observing and experimenting. The method
includes surveys, interviews, questionnaires, and others. After the collection of data, it could

8
Avtar Singh, Introduction to Law of Torts 12 (6th ed. 2013)
9
S.N. Jain, "Legal Research and Methodology," in Legal Research and Methodology 25 (Kumar Sinha ed.,
1985).
10
Julius Stone, Social Dimensions of Law and Justice 45 (1966).
11
Mark Tushnet, "Critical Legal Studies: A Political History," 100 Yale L.J. 1515 (1991).

4
be presented in the form of bar graphs, pie charts, and others. The process for doctrinal
research methodology consists of various steps, which are as follows12:

1. Identifying the research question and clarifying the scope of the research.
2. Collecting data and gathering information and measuring data on variables of interest,
which is necessary for research problems to answer the research question, test
hypotheses, and evaluate the end result. As this method emphasises the collection of
primary data it must be ensured that the information is accurate and proper.
3. Classifying data, meaning to arrange the data into homogeneous classes in accordance
with the common features present in the data, to organise information in such a
manner that similarities and differences can be quickly understood.
4. Analysing information and reduce the data to a story and then analyse it to reduce the
burden of large chunks of data by breaking them into smaller fragments that are easily
understandable.
5. After analysing the findings, the researcher finds the outcome of data that has been
collected. Its goal is to use this information to address the research question that is
stated at the start, even if the end result contradicts the hypothesis.
6. The last step of this method is to essentially provide a solution to the legal problem
that the researcher has started with suggesting whether or not a reformation is needed
in the legal system for the welfare of society examining how social issues influence
legal decisions.

12
BHAGYAMMA G, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DOCTRINAL AND NON-DOCTRINAL LEGAL RESEARCH, ILE
JOURNAL OF GOVERNANCE AND POLICY REVIEW, 1 (1) of 2023, Pg. 88-94, A

5
Doctrinal Research vis-à-vis Non-
Doctrinal Research in Indian
Courts
"It is a process where the law is studied not as an isolated set of rules but as a social
phenomenon and institution, interconnected with various human factors."13

While understanding the significance of both the methodologies of the legal research we must
understand the following:

A. In Empirical research, researcher tries to collect knowledge or information from first

hand study or primary data related to his particular matter or topic and after analysis
and interpretation of those information he draws out the conclusion of that research
work. Law is an integral part of the social process. So, the tool of research will have
to be altered to cope up with the present problems, or come up with various measures
to root-out the different social evils. And, thus, empirical legal research is one of the
best tools for this purpose. Law is for the society and law is also the outcome of
present reaction of the society. Society being a dynamic concept also influenced the
law to become dynamic in character. For upgrading the influence of law in this
dynamic state, empirical legal research is only the solution. For instance in the case of
a. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan14 wherein the Supreme Court formulated
guidelines to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, filling a legislative
void until Parliament enacted specific laws. The judgment was based on the
broader social need to protect women in the workplace, drawing on
international treaties and human rights norms. The court focused on societal
issues like gender equality and protection of women, employing a socio-legal
approach rather than strictly adhering to existing legal texts.15
b. S. P. Gupta v. Union of India 16, wherein expanded the concept of locus standi
in public interest litigation (PIL). The court focused on access to justice for the
underprivileged and emphasized the need to address social realities beyond the
13
Upendra Baxi, "Socio-Legal Research in India," in Essays in Honour of H.M. Seervai 92 (N.M. Tripathi ed.,
1974).
14
AIR 1997 SC 3011
15
This reflected a deep engagement with the social impact of law, going beyond strict textual interpretation.
16
1981 Supp (1) SCC 87

6
 constraints of procedural technicalities adopting a more progressive and
flexible approach to standing in court, recognizing that social justice requires
access to legal remedies for disadvantaged groups. This was a departure from
rigid, doctrinal approaches that limit legal action to directly affected parties.
c. Wherein the realm of environmental law, innumerable cases filed by M.C.
Mehta have showcased how courts have moved beyond doctrinal
interpretations of law to engage with broader socio-environmental concerns.
The court used non-doctrinal approaches by acknowledging social and
scientific data to enforce the right to a healthy environment under Article 21.
These cases involved the use of expert testimony, scientific reports, and socio-
environmental studies to ensure the enforcement of environmental laws. The
court’s decisions were informed by empirical data and a broader understanding
of social needs.
B. Doctrinal legal research is ‘research in law’ rather than ‘research about law’, so it
essentially regards the research process as to how the law was passed, rationale
behind it, its interpretations etc. Doctrinal research still represents a "base" in the legal
community and it demands an even higher degree of work based on this ideological
framework. For practical purposes, idiosyncratic research methodology is required.
The busy practitioner tends to be concerned with the law “as it is” and rarely has the
time to consider research that does not fit within that paradigm and timeframe.
Moreover, because of its focus on the sources of jurisprudence, established research is
more manageable and results more predictable.
It is essential to note here that even in the present times, wherein it is highly posited
that the judges merely declare the existing law, rather than creating it, judicial
creativity and law making in evident by the judges using various told of
interpretations of law. the development of common law and law as it is, is the prime
example of judges actively shaping the law through their decisions. The principles
derived from the case law are not treated as immutable truths but are continuously
tested and revised through subsequent cases17. Examples of some of such cases are as
under:

17
BHAGYAMMA G, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DOCTRINAL AND NON-DOCTRINAL LEGAL RESEARCH, ILE
JOURNAL OF GOVERNANCE AND POLICY REVIEW, 1 (1) of 2023, Pg. 88-94, A

7
 a. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala18 is a prime example of doctrinal legal
reasoning. The court examined constitutional provisions, particularly Article 368,
and used legal principles like the doctrine of "basic structure" to interpret the
Constitution. The focus was on legal interpretation through a close reading of
constitutional texts,, constitutional debates, laws, and precedents. The court used
legal doctrines to interpret the Constitution, especially emphasizing the basic
structure doctrine, which prevents Parliament from altering the Constitution’s
fundamental features. The decision was grounded in analyzing constitutional text
and legal precedents rather than broader socio-economic implications.
b. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India19 Wherein challenge to the constitutionality of
caste-based reservations in public employment under Article 16(4) was made, the
Supreme Court’s analysis revolved around interpreting the meaning and scope of
Article 16(4), which allows the state to make special provisions for the
advancement of "backward classes." The court adhered to doctrinal methods by
engaging in a rigorous examination of earlier judgments, including Balaji v. State
of Mysore20, to define the term "backward class." Thereby upholding the
reservations but imposed a 50% cap and excluded the "creamy layer" from
reservation benefits. The court's reasoning was based on doctrinal analysis of
constitutional provisions and precedents, ensuring consistency in legal
interpretation without referring to empirical research on the socio-economic status
of different castes.
c. L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India 21 the validity of provisions excluding the
jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court over the decisions of
administrative tribunals were in question. The ratio in this matter revolved around
the interpretation of Articles 32, 136, and 226 of the Constitution, which deal with
the powers of judicial review by the Supreme Court and High Courts. The court
strictly adhered to doctrinal methods, focusing on the text and history of these
constitutional provisions to determine that judicial review is a part of the basic
structure of the Constitution. Thereby, court struck down the provisions that
ousted the jurisdiction of the superior courts over administrative tribunals.

18
AIR 1973 SCC 1461
19
AIR 1993 SC 477
20
AIR 1963 SC 649
21
AIR 1997 SC 1125

8
Significance of Doctrinal v. Non-
Doctrinal Research
Significance of both the methodologies are encapsulated under the following heads:
1. Purpose and Scope:

o Doctrinal legal research is centered on the critical analysis and interpretation

of legal texts—statutes, regulations, and judicial precedents. It aims to clarify,
refine, and systematically organize legal principles, ensuring that legal norms
are applied consistently across cases. This form of research plays a key role in
maintaining the stability and predictability of the legal system. However, its
primary limitation is its narrow focus on legal materials, often neglecting the
broader social, political, and economic contexts in which laws operate. By
focusing solely on the law "as it is," doctrinal research may overlook the
realities of how laws function in practice.

o Non-doctrinal legal research takes a broader view by examining the real-

world effects of legal rules. This approach incorporates empirical methods and
interdisciplinary perspectives to analyze how laws impact individuals and
communities. It excels in revealing the social implications of legal
frameworks, such as their effectiveness, fairness, and unintended
consequences. Nevertheless, non-doctrinal research can sometimes lack the
precision and focus needed for direct application in legal practice. Its broad
scope may result in findings that are more abstract or generalized, making it
difficult to apply to specific legal issues or cases.22

2. Contribution to Legal Practice:

o Doctrinal research is highly practical for legal professionals. It provides a

structured approach to interpreting and applying the law, enabling lawyers,
judges, and policymakers to rely on established legal principles and
precedents. By offering clarity and stability, doctrinal research helps ensure
that similar cases are decided consistently, which is a cornerstone of justice.

22
BHAGYAMMA G, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DOCTRINAL AND NON-DOCTRINAL LEGAL RESEARCH, ILE
JOURNAL OF GOVERNANCE AND POLICY REVIEW, 1 (1) of 2023, Pg. 88-94, A

9
 However, this methodology's strict adherence to legal texts and precedent can
sometimes lead to inflexibility, especially when laws become outdated or are
applied rigidly without considering changing social realities.

o Non-doctrinal research, while less immediately applicable in everyday legal

practice, offers significant value in broader contexts, such as law reform and
policy development. It provides empirical insights into how laws work on the
ground, shedding light on whether they achieve their intended goals or create
unintended consequences. This is particularly useful in areas such as human
rights, criminal justice, and environmental law. However, the challenge for
legal practitioners is that non-doctrinal research may not always offer clear,
actionable solutions for specific legal cases, as it tends to focus more on
systemic issues and broader policy implications.

3. Legal Certainty vs. Legal Reform:

o Doctrinal research excels in promoting legal certainty, which is essential for

the rule of law. By focusing on consistency, it ensures that laws are interpreted
in a predictable manner, giving individuals and institutions the confidence that
the law will be applied uniformly. This predictability is crucial for the
functioning of legal systems. However, the drawback is that doctrinal research
can become too conservative, emphasizing the status quo over necessary
reform. This rigidity can limit the law’s ability to adapt to new social
challenges or evolving norms.

o Non-doctrinal research is a powerful tool for law reform. By examining the

social impact of laws, it identifies gaps, inefficiencies, and unintended
negative consequences in existing legal frameworks. It allows lawmakers to
understand how laws can be reformed to better serve society's needs. Yet, non-
doctrinal research can sometimes be overly focused on the broader context,
lacking the precision needed for immediate legal applications. This makes it
less suited for situations where the legal system demands certainty and
consistency in decision-making, such as in judicial contexts.

4. Interdisciplinary and Broader Perspectives:

10
 o Doctrinal research tends to operate within the confines of legal reasoning and
methodology, which allows for in-depth analysis of legal texts and principles.
This narrow focus, however, can be a shortcoming when dealing with complex
societal issues that intersect with the law. By not incorporating
interdisciplinary perspectives, doctrinal research may fail to account for the
broader social, economic, and political forces that shape legal systems.

o Non-doctrinal research, in contrast, benefits greatly from its

interdisciplinary nature, drawing from fields such as sociology, economics,
and political science. This approach provides a more comprehensive
understanding of the law's role in society and its effects on different
populations. The drawback, however, is that the interdisciplinary approach can
dilute the precision that legal professionals often require. By broadening the
scope of inquiry, non-doctrinal research might not always provide the legal
certainty or doctrinal clarity needed in specific legal contexts.

5. Practical Utility and Limitations:

o Doctrinal research is highly useful in practice due to its focus on legal

reasoning, precedent, and interpretation. Lawyers and judges rely heavily on
this form of research to navigate complex legal issues, apply the law
consistently, and resolve disputes. Yet, its main limitation is that it rarely
considers how laws impact society beyond the legal text, which can result in a
failure to address issues of equity, social justice, or unintended legal
consequences.

o Non-doctrinal research offers critical insights into the law’s effectiveness in

addressing social needs, particularly in terms of policy and reform. However,
its limitation lies in the fact that it often lacks the detailed, case-specific legal
analysis required for day-to-day legal practice. Its findings, while invaluable
for understanding broader social patterns, may not always translate into
actionable legal solutions for individual cases.

11
Conclusion
In sum, doctrinal legal research provides the clarity, structure, and certainty needed for the
consistent application of law, but it can be overly rigid and limited in addressing broader
social issues. Non-doctrinal research, with its focus on the real-world impact of laws and
interdisciplinary approaches, is invaluable for law reform and understanding how laws
interact with societal factors. However, it can lack the precision and applicability that
doctrinal research offers for resolving specific legal questions.

Though it is easy to target a specific methodology and identify its strengths and weaknesses,
there is no gradation between the two methods as they are all equally important for
developing and understanding the Law. Even though both methodologies have advantages
and disadvantages, a researcher can obtain both benefits by critical analysis for an all-out
result.23 The combination of methodologies (a mixed method using doctrinal and non-
doctrinal) can work together to understand the Law better because Legal doctrinal research
forms the basis for Non-Doctrinal Legal Research. The outcomes of Doctrinal Legal
Research Methodology are the foundation or footing upon which Non-Doctrinal legal
Research Methodology is based.

For instance, the landmark judgement of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, 24 the Supreme
Court has essentially synthesized both the methods wherein it had broadened the
interpretation of the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court
not only relied on a doctrinal interpretation of the constitutional provisions but also took into
account the socio-political context and the evolving concept of personal liberty, moving away
from a narrow, technical interpretation of Article 21.

Further, in the case of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka25 and Unni Krishnan v. State of
Andhra Pradesh26 as well, the Supreme Court expanded the right to education under Article
21. The cases involved questions about the right to education, particularly for marginalized
sections of society. Here the Court amalgamated the two methods as the court not only
interpreted and broadened the scope of Article 21 and 41 but also recognized the need to

23
Duncan NJ, Hutchinson T. ‘Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin Law Review.
2012;17(1):83-119.
24
AIR 1978 SC 597
25
1992 AIR 1858
26
1993 SCC (1) 645

12
address broader social and economic inequalities focusing on how educational rights affect
marginalized populations, and brought in socio-economic considerations, linking them to
broader human rights principles.

The two methodologies are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary. While
doctrinal research ensures that the legal system functions with stability and predictability,
non-doctrinal research pushes the boundaries of legal inquiry, encouraging adaptability and
reform in response to changing societal needs. Both approaches are essential for a
comprehensive understanding of the law—one providing a stable foundation, the other
ensuring that the law remains relevant and effective in addressing contemporary challenges.

13
References
 https://lawcolloquy.com/publications/blog/doctrinal-and-non-doctrinal-research-/269

 https://www.legalbites.in/research-methodology/legal-research-doctrinal-and-non-
doctrinal-896702

 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
373632259_A_COMPARATIVE_ANALYSIS_OF_DOCTRINAL_AND_NON-
DOCTRINAL_LEGAL_RESEARCH

 https://thelegalquotient.com/research-methodology/doctrinal-and-non-doctrinal-
research/2847/

 https://legodesk.com/legopedia/what-is-doctrinal-and-non-doctrinal-legal-research/

 https://www.civillawjournal.com/archives/2023.v3.i1.A.38

 https://www.legalbites.in/research-methodology/aims-and-basic-tools-of-doctrinal-
research-1003816

 https://www.legalbites.in/research-methodology/inter-relation-between-doctrinal-and-
non-doctrinal-research-981160

 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
316895684_Legal_Research_of_Doctrinal_and_Non-Doctrinal

 https://blog.ipleaders.in/doctrinal-and-non-doctrinal-legal-research/

 Bhagyamma G, A Comparative Analysis of Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal Legal

Research, ILE Journal of Governance and Policy Review, 2023; 3(1): 08-17, available
at
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373632259_A_COMPARATIVE_ANALYS
IS_OF_DOCTRINAL_AND_NON-DOCTRINAL_LEGAL_RESEARCH

 Rita Abhavan Ngwoke, Ibiene P Mbano and Oriaifo Helynn, A critical appraisal of
doctrinal and Non-doctrinal legal research methodologies in contemporary times
International Journal of Civil Law and Legal Research 2023; 3(1): 08-17, available at
https://www.civillawjournal.com/article/38/3-1-1-747.pdf

14
 Duncan NJ, Hutchinson T. ‘Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal
research. Deakin Law Review. 2012;17(1):83-119.

 Avtar Singh, Introduction to Law of Torts 12 (6th ed. 2013)

 S.N. Jain, "Legal Research and Methodology," in Legal Research and Methodology
25 (Kumar Sinha ed., 1985)

 Holmes OW. ‘The path of the law’, Harvard Law Review. 1997;110(5):991-1009.

 Dobinson I. & Francis J., Qualitative Legal Research, (Michael McConville& Wing
Hong Chui eds., 2007).

 S.N.Jain, Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal Legal Research, 14 J ILI 487 (1972)

 Julius Stone, Social Dimensions of Law and Justice, 45 (1966).

 Mark Tushnet, "Critical Legal Studies: A Political History," 100 Yale L.J. 1515
(1991).

15