Constitutional Morality
Origin and Supreme Court Jurisprudence
The concept of "constitutional morality" was first articulated in Indian judicial discourse by the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalised consensual same-sex relations by striking down Section 377 IPC. Chief Justice Dipak Misra in Navtej Singh Johar held: "Constitutional morality would prevail over social morality." The Court drew upon Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's use of the phrase in the Constituent Assembly Debates, where Ambedkar argued that "constitutional morality" — adherence to constitutional forms, procedures, and values — must be nurtured and cultivated even where it is not naturally present in society. The concept was further developed in Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) — the Right to Privacy judgment — where the nine-judge bench affirmed that constitutional values like dignity and privacy cannot be overridden by social convention or majority preference.
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): Five-judge bench; struck down Section 377 IPC as unconstitutional in its application to consensual adult same-sex relations.
- Key ratio: Constitutional morality prevails over social/popular morality; the Constitution is not a majoritarian instrument.
- Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): Nine-judge bench; unanimously held Right to Privacy as a fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21.
- Counter-majoritarianism: The doctrine that courts must protect individual rights against majority will — a foundational principle of constitutional democracy.
- Ambedkar, Constituent Assembly Debates (1948): "Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it."
● Tracked since February 21, 2026 · last seen April 08, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes