The term “constitutional morality” has gained prominence in Supreme Court judgments over the past decade. It refers to interpreting the Constitution not merely by its text, but in light of its underlying principles such as liberty, equality, and dignity.
In landmark cases like Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), the Court relied on constitutional morality to strike down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, affirming LGBTQ+ rights. Similarly, debates around freedom of expression, gender justice, and privacy often hinge on this principle.
Judicial philosophy plays a critical role in this context. While some judges favor strict textualism, others adopt a more expansive interpretation of fundamental rights. This interplay shapes how constitutional guarantees evolve with changing societal values.
Constitutional morality ensures that constitutional principles remain relevant in a modern democracy. It acts as a safeguard against majoritarian impulses, reminding that the Constitution protects not just popular will but also individual rights and minority interests.
For scholars and practitioners, studying constitutional morality offers insight into how India’s judiciary balances law, society, and justice. It emphasizes that the Constitution is a living document, evolving with time while upholding its foundational ideals.