"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike...." In…

Constitutional morality, as Ambedkar urged, is not mere political morality but faith in the Constitution’s values of liberty, equality and fraternity. The Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) and Sabarimala (2018) described it as a commitment to constitutional principles over majoritarian or traditional practices. It is rooted in the Preamble, Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 15 and 21), Directive Principles and the Constitution’s transformative purpose, binding citizens and high functionaries.

In judicial independence, constitutional morality protects judges from executive or legislative pressure. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) shows this: the Court’s fearless assertion of the basic structure required fidelity to constitutional limits rather than deference to political power.

For accountability, the same morality requires judges to answer to the Constitution without surrendering independence. It restrains overreach, keeping courts within the text, separation of powers and reasoned interpretation, and it underpins mechanisms of answerability: the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997) and the in-house procedure (1999); CPIO, Supreme Court v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal (2019), which brought the CJI's office under the RTI Act; and the public disclosure of Supreme Court judges' assets in 2025. The Justice Yashwant Varma episode (2025), where an in-house inquiry was followed by removal proceedings under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, shows these checks at work.

The balance is struck by keeping accountability inside constitutional channels. The NJAC judgment (2015) struck down the 99th Amendment to keep appointments free of executive control, yet acknowledged the collegium's opacity; publishing collegium resolutions and revising the Memorandum of Procedure are responses to that criticism. Removal under Article 124(4) is deliberately difficult, so that accountability does not become a tool of political pressure, while review and curative petitions correct judicial error from within.

Thus, constitutional morality is the fulcrum: it secures fearless adjudication while demanding constitutional fidelity, ensuring that judicial independence and accountability reinforce rather than undermine each other.