What goes inside any layman when he come across a lawman, that how good is it to be a lawyer knowing the law and all about it. But the pith of the profession is skill of finding the law, not knowing it and then understanding is must as it’s always an edge. One question that always come to mind whenever talked about law is, whether law is an art or science. Well it is a matter of choice. Rather than imaging black and white, we should see the grey in between. I personally think that it has dual nature, we regard it as a form of art as long as it checks our oratory, debating and mooting skills whereas is science when it comes to experimentation, researching and other science dependencies. In your first year at law school you study legal history. I once, remember being asked by a curious, What role does history play in enforcement of law and order. Being rational in his approach he added, we say law is dynamic and changes with changing facets accordingly. It was a reasonable question although no law and order is possible without sound knowledge of its history or origin. Necessity is regarded as mother of inventions. Such necessities can be re-derived only with good knowledge of history. At the same time legal history reflects the retrospective nature of law which simultaneously gives it a prospective touch.