Singhvi- 3. constitutional morality was never... ... Sabarimala Reference : Live Updates From Supreme Court 9-Judge Bench [Day 4]

Singhvi- 3. constitutional morality was never dreamt of by anyone as additional ground of derogation.

J Nagarathna: legislature can't be struck down on grounds of constitutional morality, part III, legislative competence

Singhvi- 4. framers consciously used morality

Even at the time of drafting of Part III by the ‘Sub-Committee on Fundamental Rights,’ the apprehension was expressed by members of the Sub-Committee that the term morality was vague, incapable of precise definition and susceptible to misuse.

Mr. K.T. Shah, in his comments on Article 9 of the Draft Report on Fundamental Rights (equivalent to Article 19 of our Constitution), stated thus:- “Article 9, dealing with several of the primary freedoms or civil liberties, makes them subject to “public order and morality”. The last named is a very vague term. Its connotation changes substantially form time to time.

… In a land of many religions, with different conceptions of morality, different customs, usages, and ideals, it would be extremely difficult to get unanimity on what constitutes morality. …

If this is not to degenerate into a tyranny of the majority, it is necessary to define more clearly what is meant by the term “morality,” or to drop this exception altogether."

refers to KA Abbas and S. Rangarajan case

Indian Hotel & Restaurant v State of Maharashtra- on morality-“It needs to be borne in mind that there may be certain activities which the society perceives as immoral per se. It may include gambling (though that is also becoming a debatable issue now), prostitution, etc.) …

However, a practice which may not be immoral by societal standards cannot be thrusted (sic) upon the society as immoral by the State with its own notion of morality and thereby exercise “social control.” Furthermore, and in any case, any legislation of this nature has to pass the muster of constitutional provisions as well. We have examined the issues raised in the aforesaid context.”

Also reads Kesavananda Bharti and SP Gupta as well

J Nagarathna: SP Gupta, it was rightly applied to test the duties of constitutional authorities, we can't wholesale throw it away. It may be a very fluid test to strike down a legislation-it should not be applied