Underlining that Constitutional morality must outweigh the argument of “public morality, even if it be the majoritarian view”, Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said that personal or “popular morality” often conflicts with standards expected by the Constitution.He was speaking at a seminar organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad on February 21.To illustrate the “deep societal faultlines” that persist after 75 years of Independence, Justice Bhuyan shared two separate “random” instances: a PhD student denied accommodation in Delhi after her name revealed her Muslim identity and a recent incident in Odisha where parents refused to let their children eat food prepared by a Dalit woman in a mid-day meal programme.Also Read | From the Urdu Press: ‘Shoe-throwing at CJI reflects caste bias, fuelled in recent times’, ‘RSS should defend Muslim rights’Referring to the incident in Delhi involving his daughter’s friend, Justice Bhuyan said: “She approached a landlady who was running a working women’s hostel in her building in South Delhi. The landlady asked her as to what her name was. When she told her name, which was quite ambivalent, the landlady queried further and asked her about her surname and when she said that, it revealed her Muslim identity. The landlady then told her quite bluntly that accommodation was not available and that she could search for some other place.”Such cases, he said, are merely the “tip of the iceberg”.Recalling the landmark 2009 judgement in Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court struck down provisions that criminalised homosexuality, Justice Bhuyan said the ruling explicitly restricted the state from giving weight to public morality over Constitutional morality.Also Read | ‘Homebound’ frames the prejudices we live with but refuse to confront“The case rejected the argument made by the Union of India that popular morality can be a legitimate state purpose and that the Union has the right to enforce the same through the law. The Delhi High Court held that popular morality or public disapproval of certain acts is not a valid justification for restriction of the fundamental rights under Article 21,” he said.Story continues below this adJustice Bhuyan also said that Constitutional morality ensures that democratic institutions exercise restraint and adhere to Constitutional values and not bulldoze through on the strength of numbers, authority and power.Also Read | The case for extending constitutional protections to Muslim and Christian DalitsQuoting Justice Thoroughgood “Thurgood” Marshall, a former US Supreme Court Justice, Justice Bhuyan told district court judges that the “only real source of power” for a judge is the respect of the people, earned through independence and fidelity to the Constitution. © The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:supreme court