"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential ... | UPSC Mains Model Answer

"Constitutional morality is the fulcrum which acts as an essential check upon the high functionaries and citizens alike." In view of the above observation of the Supreme Court, explain the concept of constitutional morality and its application to ensure balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability in India.

Based on 32 evaluated answers to this question on CollectorBabu: here is what aspirants most often missed, the mistakes that cost marks, and a model answer.

What most aspirants missed

Impeachment under Article 124(4)-(5), with the two-thirds majority requirement and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, as the formal accountability mechanism.
Ambedkar's Constituent Assembly articulation of constitutional morality and the Navtej Singh Johar (2018) distinction between constitutional and popular morality.
The NJAC verdict (2015) as the central case on the independence versus accountability balance.
The in-house procedure (1999) based on the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997) as a self-regulation tool.
Contempt powers under Articles 129 and 215 as a check, with the duty to use them with restraint.
An explicit sentence showing how constitutional morality reconciles the two, rather than listing them separately.

Common mistakes

Defining constitutional morality vaguely, without the Ambedkar or Navtej Johar anchor, so the concept is not really explained.
Listing independence and accountability in separate sections without showing the tension and how constitutional morality balances them.
Making unsupported claims about the judiciary, such as saying accountability mechanisms are too few, without citing specific mechanisms or failures.
Mixing up provisions, such as placing Article 143 advisory jurisdiction or Article 142 orders under accountability or independence.

What the better answers did

Opening with a precise definition of constitutional morality, tied to a Supreme Court judgment and Ambedkar's speech.
Presenting independence and accountability as two sides of one balance, with the NJAC verdict and collegium debate as live examples.
Citing correct provisions, such as Article 124(4)-(5) for impeachment and Articles 129 and 215 for contempt.
Using clear sub-headings or a two-column comparison that addresses the balance demand directly.

Introduction

Open by defining constitutional morality through Ambedkar and Navtej Johar, then state in one line that it has to secure both judicial independence and judicial accountability.

Conclusion

Close by saying that the balance holds only when the judiciary resists external pressure and also submits to internal and constitutional scrutiny, using the NJAC verdict or collegium transparency as a concrete example.

Model answer

Constitutional morality, as Dr B.R. Ambedkar stressed in the Constituent Assembly, means fidelity to the core values of the Constitution, such as liberty, equality, fraternity and secularism, rather than to popular or social sentiment. In Navtej Singh Johar (2018), the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality must prevail over popular morality. Applied to the judiciary, it demands both independence from external pressure and accountability from within.

Independence: protection from pressure

Security of tenure and fixed service conditions (Articles 124 and 125) insulate judges from the executive.
The Second Judges Case (1993) entrenched collegium-based appointments, and the NJAC verdict (2015) struck down the 99th Amendment as it threatened judicial independence.
The basic structure doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973) keeps judicial review beyond the amending power of Parliament.

Accountability: checks on the judiciary

Impeachment under Article 124(4)-(5) needs a two-thirds majority of members present and voting, plus a majority of total membership in each House; the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 governs the procedure.
The in-house procedure (1999), based on the Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1997), lets the judiciary examine misconduct internally.
Contempt powers under Articles 129 and 215 must be exercised with restraint, not to shield judges from criticism.

Balancing the two

The high threshold for impeachment protects judges from political vendetta, while in-house inquiry and voluntary asset declarations address misconduct without external control.
The opacity of the collegium shows the gap: independence without transparency weakens public trust, so reforms such as publishing collegium decisions are needed.

Constitutional morality ensures that judicial independence is not a shield against scrutiny. The fulcrum works when the judiciary resists executive pressure and also accepts scrutiny of its own conduct.

Write this answer and get it evaluated

Handwritten answers, expert-reviewed, back in under 24 hours. Start with the ₹49 Trial.

Evaluate my answer