Societal fault lines still run deep in country: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Citing an example of his daughter’s Muslim friend being denied accommodation because of her religious identity, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court said such instances show how far the country remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality. Justice Bhuyan, speaking at a seminar organised by the Telangana Judges’ Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy, said constitutional morality must outweigh public morality, “even if it is the majoritarian view.”

He also noted that although court costs in India are relatively low compared to other countries, associated expenses, including lawyers’ fees, make it nearly impossible for ordinary citizens in remote areas to approach courts. He said constitutional morality is the benchmark the statute expects citizens to adhere to, adding that the Constitution’s objective is fraternity and brotherhood. “The emphasis on constitutional morality is grounded in the premise that the morality we practise at home or within communities may fall short of, or differ from, the morality the Constitution expects us to uphold,” he said.

Such differences are particularly visible in matters of marriage and renting out premises, he added.

He cited the example of his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar, who was denied accommodation by a landlady running a working women’s hostel in Delhi because of her Muslim identity. Referring to media reports, Justice Bhuyan cited another instance of parents protesting aggressively against a Dalit cook preparing food under the mid-day meal scheme. “These are just random examples-only the tip of the iceberg. They reveal how deep our societal fault lines run and show how far we still are from the benchmark of constitutional morality, even 75 years into our Republic,” he said.

Referring to the Delhi High Court’s judgment in the Naz Foundation case, he noted that the court held that popular morality and public disapproval are not valid grounds to restrict fundamental rights under Article 21.

He said popular morality is distinct from constitutional morality, as the latter is rooted in constitutional values.