During the ongoing Sabarimala reference hearing, the Supreme Court of India addressed objections raised by the Centre regarding the ruling by former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud that decriminalized adultery. The Centre, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, argued against the reliance on foreign scholars, stating that such references are inappropriate in Indian judgments. Mehta criticized the concept of 'constitutional morality' as reflected in the court's previous rulings on adultery and homosexuality, suggesting that these judgments could surprise historical figures like BR Ambedkar. Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked that the quotes from foreign scholars are subjective and not the focal point of the case. The Centre's stance is that while it does not contest the striking down of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), it disagrees with the reasoning behind the decision. The court's discussion highlighted the tension between constitutional and societal morality, with Justice Nagarathna asserting that constitutional morality is vital for governance. The Centre is now urging the Supreme Court to reconsider its stance on the decriminalization of adultery, raising questions about judicial interpretation of morality under the Constitution.