In a wide-ranging conversation on Pause with Nandini, Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi offered a deeply reflective examination of law, caste and constitutional values, drawing on the enduring philosophy of B. R. Ambedkar.
Speaking with Nandini Sen Mehra for a Dalit History Month special in association with Hindus for Human Rights Australia, Sondhi unpacked how Ambedkar’s idea of “constitutional morality” continues to shape — and challenge — India’s legal system.
Constitutional morality: Protecting the “underdog”
Sondhi described constitutional morality as a guiding principle that compels courts to look beyond both popular sentiment and narrow legal interpretation.
At its core, he argued, lies a simple but powerful test: identifying the “underdog” in any legal conflict.
“Where the balance of power is skewed, courts ought to be guided by constitutional morality,” he said, emphasising that it must “transcend societal morality and even the plain text of the Constitution.”
Illustrating this, he pointed to cases involving custodial killings, where public outrage against alleged offenders can overshadow due process. Even in cases involving heinous crimes, he stressed, the rule of law demands independent investigation and accountability.
This tension — between public emotion and legal principle — is where constitutional morality becomes critical.
Courts, subjectivity and ideological tensions
Sondhi acknowledged that applying constitutional morality is not straightforward. With multiple benches of the Supreme Court interpreting similar questions differently, inconsistency is inevitable.
He cited ongoing debates such as the Sabarimala case, where competing claims of religious freedom and gender equality continue to divide judicial opinion.
“There’s bound to be disparity of views… even on the same facts,” he noted, adding that interpretation is shaped not just by law, but by judicial philosophy and broader social currents.
Manusmriti in courts: Context versus concern
Addressing concerns about references to ancient texts like the Manusmriti in judicial reasoning, Sondhi took a nuanced position.
While he did not oppose contextual references to religious or philosophical texts, he warned against their over-reliance in constitutional adjudication.
“If such texts become the sole basis for deciding constitutional questions, then we need to be alarmed,” he said.
He also pointed to structural issues — including lack of diversity in the higher judiciary — that may shape how such references are interpreted.
“Caste is the law”? Access to justice tells the story
Responding to the provocative idea that “caste is the law” in India, Sondhi said the claim reflects lived realities, especially at the margins.
For many, he noted, the law is not the Supreme Court but the local police officer or bureaucrat — spaces where caste hierarchies can strongly influence outcomes.
“Your very entitlement to be heard… can depend on the dominant caste you belong to or don’t,” he said.
However, he cautioned against overgeneralisation, noting that class, wealth and access to legal resources also shape justice outcomes.
Invisible caste in urban and diaspora spaces
The conversation also explored how caste operates subtly in urban and diaspora contexts — often hidden behind markers like class, occupation, or even dietary preferences.
Practices such as housing discrimination, marriage choices and workplace dynamics continue to reflect caste biases, even when not explicitly acknowledged.
Sondhi pointed out that caste is not confined to Hindu society alone, but can manifest across religions in different forms.
Labour, unions and the gig economy
On labour rights, Sondhi suggested that while trade unions have historically advanced class struggles, they have not always effectively addressed caste and gender inequities.
In an era of gig work and “Uberised” labour, he warned that protections for already marginalised workers — many from caste-oppressed backgrounds — are eroding.
Unions, he said, face competing priorities and structural limitations, making their role in addressing caste discrimination uncertain.
Domestic workers and the limits of law
Highlighting the plight of domestic workers, Sondhi noted the absence of comprehensive national legislation protecting their rights.
Most remain in the informal sector, with limited legal recognition or enforcement of protections.
He linked this gap directly to Ambedkar’s vision of social and economic equality, arguing that failure to even “see” such workers reflects a deeper systemic failure.
Ambedkar’s enduring moral force
For Sondhi, Ambedkar’s relevance lies not just in his role as the architect of India’s Constitution, but in his moral clarity and intellectual range.
From economics to law to social reform, Ambedkar’s work continues to offer a framework for confronting inequality in modern societies.
“At this moment globally… we need voices driven by conscience,” Sondhi said, pointing to conflicts and crises worldwide.
He added that Ambedkar’s ideas remain essential in navigating deeply divided societies — not just in India, but globally.
