The Indian Constitution is not merely a legal document but a moral charter that seeks to transform a deeply hierarchical society into one based on equality, liberty, and fraternity. In this transformative project, the concept of constitutional morality assumes central importance. It requires that governance and adjudication be guided not by prevailing social norms but by constitutional principles of justice, dignity, and human rights. At the same time, social morality—the set of values and norms widely held by society—continues to exert a powerful influence on law, politics, and culture. The tension between these two moralities often defines the trajectory of India’s constitutional jurisprudence.
The idea of constitutional morality was first articulated in India by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar during the Constituent Assembly debates. He emphasized that democracy in India would not succeed merely through formal institutions but only when people and leaders internalize constitutional morality—respect for the rule of law, equality, and fundamental rights. Constitutional morality, therefore, represents adherence to the values enshrined in the Constitution, even if they contradict dominant societal beliefs. Social morality, on the other hand, reflects traditional customs, religious norms, and majoritarian values, which may or may not align with constitutional ideals.
The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly invoked constitutional morality when social morality has clashed with fundamental rights. In Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT of Delhi (2009), the Delhi High Court decriminalized consensual homosexual acts, holding that morality under Article 21 cannot be reduced to popular social morality but must be tested against constitutional morality. Though this judgment was temporarily overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v. Union of India (2013), the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) restored the progressive view, affirming that Section 377 IPC could not criminalize same-sex relations as it violated constitutional guarantees of dignity, autonomy, and equality, regardless of prevailing societal disapproval.
Similarly, in the Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018), popularly known as the Sabarimala case, the Supreme Court struck down the exclusion of women of menstruating age from the Sabarimala temple. The Court explicitly emphasized that constitutional morality, not social morality rooted in patriarchal traditions, must guide the interpretation of fundamental rights. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud noted that practices violating women’s dignity and equality cannot be shielded under the garb of religious freedom. In Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalized adultery, the Court again highlighted that laws rooted in outdated social morality, treating women as property of men, were unconstitutional.
These cases illustrate how constitutional morality acts as a higher normative framework that protects individual rights against social prejudices. Social morality, being fluid and influenced by majoritarian opinion, often upholds discriminatory practices against women, LGBTQ+ persons, Dalits, and minorities. Without constitutional morality, democracy risks being reduced to majoritarianism where individual rights are sacrificed at the altar of public opinion.
At the same time, critics argue that an overemphasis on constitutional morality may alienate society if reforms are perceived as judicial impositions rather than organic change. The judiciary, while championing constitutional values, must balance sensitivity toward societal contexts with its duty to uphold fundamental rights. This delicate balance is evident in cases where courts have taken a gradualist approach, such as in personal law reforms or the debate on the Uniform Civil Code.
In conclusion, the conflict between constitutional morality and social morality reflects India’s ongoing struggle to reconcile tradition with modernity, community values with individual rights. While social morality represents lived traditions, constitutional morality embodies aspirational ideals of justice and equality. The role of the judiciary and the State is to ensure that constitutional morality prevails whenever social morality threatens to undermine fundamental rights. Only by adhering to constitutional morality can India fulfill its transformative promise of building a just and egalitarian society.
