Context
There is only one woman judge in the Court’s full strength of 34 judges as of now, raising questions about inclusivity, equity, and the broader implications for justice delivery.
Women in Supreme Court of India
(a) Since the Supreme Court’s inception in 1950, only 11 women judges (3.8% of total judges) have served the Supreme Court to date, and it has never had more than 4 women judges serving at the same time. The first woman was Justice Fathima Beevi in 1989.
(b) The last major step in 2021, when 3 women became SC judges, briefly thwarting women’s representation above ten percent.
(c) Notably, women from SC, ST, or other vulnerable communities have been entirely left out.
(d) Justice B.V. Nagarathna is currently the only woman judge on the bench and is likely to become India’s first woman Chief Justice in 2027.
Why Women’s Representation Matters?
(i) Enhancing Judicial Sensitivity and Perspective: Women judges bring lived experiences that enrich judicial reasoning, especially in cases involving: Gender-based violence; Workplace harassment; Family law and custody disputes; Reproductive rights.
(ii) Legitimacy and Public Trust: A judiciary that includes women portends fairness and inclusivity. It ensures public confidence in the legal system and asserts the constitutional promise under Article 16.
(iii) Correcting Historical Exclusion: The severe underrepresentation shows systemic hurdles in legal education, practice, and promotion.
(iv) Government’s Role in Promoting Diversity: There is no reservation for women in judicial appointments. But the government has asked High Courts to regard social diversity, including gender, when recommending candidates.
Challenges to Inclusion
(i) Problem with the Collegium System: The Collegium system, consisting of the CJI and 4 senior-most judges, decides appointments. But, its functioning is non-transparent and inconsistent.
(a) Caste, region, and religion sometimes become parameters, but gender is not on the radar as a criterion.
(b) Resolutions regarding appointments have also been inconsistent, coupled with a lack of transparency.
(ii) Exclusion from the Bar: Only one woman, Justice Indu Malhotra directly appointed from the Bar to the Supreme Court, while nine men tread this path.
(iii) Limited Pipeline: Very few women make it to senior positions in this profession, reducing their visibility for elevation. Justice Nagarathna will serve only for thirty-six days as a CJI in 2027. This highlights the limitations created by delayed appointments.
(iv) Workplace Bias: Gender orthodoxy and inadequate institutional support discourage women from taking the judiciary as a career option.
- Political Participation of Women in India
- Women in Combat Roles – India’s Armed Forces Embrace Inclusion
- The Role of Women in Agriculture: Impact & Challenges
- All About NDA for Girls: Eligibility and Preparation Tips
Way Forward
(i) Institutionalize diversity: Gender, caste, religion, and region must be formal criteria in judicial appointments.
(ii) Direct appointments from the Bar: More women Senior Advocates should get the opportunity.
(iii) Early appointments: Appoint women at younger ages so that they can have longer tenures and pathways to seniority.
(iv) Transparent selection: Collegium decisions need to be made public with clear justifications about the arguments.
Conclusion
The Apex court of India has always ensured gender equality in its judgments. But it falls short when it comes to implementing them in their own structure. So, ameliorating the chronic gender imbalance is not just about gender fairness in the legal profession but about ensuring that the Court truly represents the people it serves.