The Doctrine of Constitutional Morality in Indian Jurisprudence

 The Doctrine of Constitutional Morality in Indian Jurisprudence

Introduction

In recent years, the doctrine of Constitutional Morality has emerged as an important principle shaping Indian constitutional jurisprudence. Although the term 'Constitutional Morality' was not originally codified in the Indian Constitution, it has been invoked by the Supreme Court in a series of landmark judgments to expand the meaning and scope of constitutional rights and values. This doctrine serves as a guiding compass for the interpretation of the Constitution, especially in cases where the text is silent or ambiguous.

The essence of Constitutional Morality lies in upholding the values enshrined in the Constitution — such as justice, liberty, equality, fraternity, secularism, and the rule of law — even when these values conflict with popular morality or societal norms. It is a reminder that the Constitution is not merely a legal document but a living text meant to guide the social, political, and moral life of the nation.

Historical Evolution

Though the concept is relatively new in Indian legal discourse, the seeds of Constitutional Morality were sown by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the founding father of the Constitution. In the Constituent Assembly Debates, Ambedkar emphasized that mere adherence to constitutional provisions would not suffice; what was equally needed was a commitment to constitutional morality — a sense of restraint and responsibility among both citizens and institutions.

However, for decades after independence, the doctrine remained unaddressed. It was only in the 21st century that the judiciary began actively invoking Constitutional Morality to address issues involving fundamental rights, minority protection, individual dignity, and non-discrimination.

Defining Constitutional Morality

Constitutional Morality refers to the commitment to uphold and enforce the core principles of the Constitution, even if they go against popular opinion or traditional morality. It demands that laws, policies, and judicial interpretations must align with the values of constitutional democracy, including:

• Protection of individual dignity and autonomy.

• Equality before law and non-discrimination.

• Secularism and fraternity.

• Respect for dissent and plurality.

Importantly, Constitutional Morality often serves as a higher standard than societal morality, which may be shaped by prejudice, custom, or majoritarian views.

Judicial Pronouncements and Development

1. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)

In this case, the Supreme Court struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code to decriminalize consensual homosexual conduct among adults. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, in his concurring opinion, emphasized that Constitutional Morality requires the protection of individual choice and dignity, even if such choices offend the majority's moral views.

2. Sabarimala Temple Entry Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala, 2018)

In this case, the Supreme Court applied Constitutional Morality to hold that prohibiting the entry of women aged 10–50 years into the Sabarimala temple violated their fundamental rights. The Court observed that religious practices must conform to constitutional values such as equality and gender justice, rather than being justified solely on the basis of custom or tradition.

3. NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018)

The Supreme Court stressed that Constitutional Morality obliges both the Union and State governments to respect the federal structure of the Constitution, cooperative federalism, and the role of elected governments. The doctrine was employed to prevent arbitrary use of central powers over the National Capital Territory.

4. Manoj Narula v. Union of India (2014)

The Court, while discussing the appointment of ministers with criminal backgrounds, underlined that Constitutional Morality demands purity in public life and the enforcement of ethical standards in governance.

Principles Embodied by Constitutional Morality

1. Supremacy of Fundamental Rights

Constitutional Morality upholds that fundamental rights, such as the right to equality, privacy, and freedom of expression, cannot be overridden by majoritarian morality or public sentiment.

2. Protection of Minority Rights

Minorities, whether religious, linguistic, sexual, or cultural are especially safeguarded under Constitutional Morality, which prevents the tyranny of the majority.

3. Accountability and Integrity in Public Life

Governance, elections, and legislative action must be consistent with constitutional values, not merely with political expediency.

4. Social Transformation

The doctrine pushes the state to foster progressive social change: be it in the realm of gender justice, LGBTQ+ rights, caste discrimination, or secularism: even in the face of societal resistance.

Criticism and Challenges

Although comprising of the novel ideas of the doctrine of constitutional morality, it is not without criticisms and challenges: 

• Subjectivity: Critics argue that the doctrine is vague and subjective, allowing judges excessive discretion to substitute personal moral values for constitutional interpretation.

• Judicial Overreach: There is concern that frequent reliance on Constitutional Morality may lead courts to encroach upon legislative or executive domains.

• Conflict with Popular Morality: In a democracy, public sentiment cannot be entirely dismissed. Excessive use of this doctrine may alienate the judiciary from societal realities.

However, the Court has clarified that Constitutional Morality must be based on the text, structure, and spirit of the Constitution — not on individual notions of morality

The Way Forward

For Constitutional Morality to function as a legitimate tool in Indian jurisprudence:

1. Clear Judicial Standards must be laid down to guide its application.

2. Harmonization between constitutional values and societal transformation should be sought, to ensure gradual and sustainable social change.

3. Institutional Restraint should be exercised by the judiciary to avoid perceptions of activism.

If used carefully, the doctrine can continue to serve as a valid defence against injustice, inequality, and prejudice, ensuring that the Constitution remains a living and dynamic document.

Conclusion

The doctrine of Constitutional Morality has revolutionized Indian constitutional law by empowering the judiciary to protect the fundamental values of the Constitution against the transient morality of the majority or the inertia of tradition. It has transformed the Court from a mere interpreter of law into a guardian of the constitutional conscience of the nation.

Yet, with this power comes great responsibility. The judiciary must tread carefully to ensure that Constitutional Morality supplements and does not supplant the will of the people as expressed through democratic processes. The journey of this doctrine is ongoing, and its future will depend on how wisely it is invoked to balance liberty with order, progress with tradition, and rights with responsibilities.

Closing Credits

Author: Isha Tiwari

"The views expressed are personal. This article is intended for educational purposes

and public discourse. Feedback and constructive criticism are welcome!"