Transformative Constitutionalism and Legal Realism in India’s Rights Jurisprudence

Abstract

Legal Realism represents a pragmatic approach to understanding law as it operates in real-life conditions, emphasizing judicial behaviour, social context, and human experience over rigid legal formalism. In the Indian context, the judiciary has progressively embraced realist jurisprudence, particularly in landmark constitutional interpretations that align law with evolving social morality. This paper examines the manifestation of Legal Realism in Indian courts, focusing on two transformative judgments: Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), which recognized the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right, and Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), which decriminalized consensual same-sex relations. Through doctrinal analysis and empirical review of judicial reasoning, this study highlights how Indian courts have shifted from rigid positivism to a realist paradigm that places human dignity, liberty, and equality at the centre of constitutional interpretation. The findings suggest that Legal Realism has not only reshaped judicial philosophy but has also strengthened India’s constitutional democracy by harmonizing legal reasoning with social change.