Answer

Introduction

Constitutional morality refers to the commitment to the substantive values of democracy like justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity rather than mere adherence to the legal text. Rooted in the Constitution’s “essential humanity,” it acts as a normative compass that prevents the transformation of democracy into a majoritarian tyranny by prioritizing individual dignity over popular sentiment.

Body

The Evolving Role of the Judiciary

• Counter-Majoritarian Check: The judiciary uses constitutional morality to protect minority rights against “public morality” or majoritarian impulses.
  Eg: In Navtej Singh Johar (2018), the Supreme Court (SC) held that the “rectitude of a majoritarian government” cannot override the constitutional rights of the LGBTQ+ community.
• Transformative Constitutionalism: The Court interprets the Constitution as a living document intended to rectify historical social injustices and promote an egalitarian social order.
  Eg: In the Sabarimala Case (2018), the Court ruled that “public morality” under Article 25 must yield to the overarching constitutional morality of gender equality.
• Safeguarding Institutional Integrity: Constitutional morality is invoked to ensure that constitutional functionaries exercise their powers with transparency and restraint.
  Eg: In State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor (2025), the SC ruled that the prolonged withholding of assent to bills by a Governor is unconstitutional and violates the spirit of “cooperative federalism”.
• Protection of Individual Dignity: The judiciary considers dignity the core of the Constitution, meaning the State must treat every person humanely, even prisoners.
  Eg: In September 2025, former CJI B.R. Gavai described human dignity as an “inviolable constitutional value” that binds together personal liberty and fraternity.
• Expanding Fundamental Rights: By reading “essential humanity” into Article 21, the Court has elevated socio-economic needs to the status of fundamental rights.
  Eg: In the Sukdeb Saha Verdict (2025), the Supreme Court recognized mental health as a essential right, shifting it from a statutory benefit to a constitutional entitlement.
• Ensuring Rule of Law: The doctrine acts as a “laser beam” in institution-building, ensuring that the exercise of power is not arbitrary or despotic.
  
• Empowering the Electorate: The judiciary employs this doctrine to strengthen the democratic process by ensuring transparency in elections and governance.
  Eg: The Court’s reinforcement of the NOTA option was cited by the judiciary as a way to ensure the electorate has a meaningful choice and the ability to express dissent.
• Bridging Law and Justice: Constitutional morality allows judges to look beyond “black-letter law” to achieve “complete justice” under Article 142.

Conclusion

Constitutional morality serves as a “shield against constitutional injustice” rather than a “sword for judicial supremacy.” As highlighted by the Chief Justice in early 2026, the doctrine warrants fairness and restraint in judicial administration, particularly in the “master of the roster” functions. By grounding its interpretations in the essential humanity of the Constitution, the judiciary ensures that India remains a principled democracy where the “living spirit” of the law prevails over literalism.

DOWNLOAD PDF