Bridging Gender Gap in Indian Judiciary

Bridging Gender Gap in India’s Higher Judiciary

Syllabus:

GS Paper – 2 Issues Related to Women, Inclusive Growth

Why in the News?

The India Justice Report 2025 has exposed persistent gender disparity in India’s higher judiciary, with women constituting only 14% of High Court judges and 3.1% of Supreme Court judges. The article highlights the urgent need for systemic reforms, including an All-India Judicial Service, to ensure merit-based, inclusive, and transparent judicial appointments in the context of the evolving global order and the need for an inclusive digital future.

Current State of Gender Representation in Judiciary

• Underrepresentation Reality: Women form only 14% of High Court judges and 3.1% of Supreme Court judges, revealing a serious imbalance in India’s judicial system.
• Token Presence: Among 34 Supreme Court judges, only one is a woman, and if she retires without new appointments, the apex court will again have no woman judge.
• High Court Scenario: Of the 25 High Courts, only one is headed by a woman Chief Justice, showcasing gender inequality even at the leadership level.
• Persisting Disparity: Despite earlier calls for gender inclusion, no substantive institutional effort has been made to correct this unequal representation.
• Broader Impact: This skewed representation affects judicial sensitivity toward gender-based issues, diversity of perspectives, and overall public trust in judicial impartiality. It also contributes to potential economic losses due to the underutilization of talent.

Key Constitutional and Institutional Initiatives: Gender Gap

• Article 312: Empowers Parliament to create new All-India Services, including AIJS, as part of the constitutional guidelines for judicial reforms.
• India Justice Report 2025: Reveals only 14% High Court and 3.1% Supreme Court judges are women.
• President Droupadi Murmu (2023): Advocated for AIJS to ensure transparency and inclusivity.
• UPSC Model: Ensures transparent recruitment to IAS, IPS, IFS, demonstrating inclusivity.
• National Judicial Academy: Trains judges and promotes judicial ethics, contributing to civic education within the legal system.
• PESO & Infrastructure Reports: Highlight need for gender-sensitive workplace infrastructure and bridging the digital divide in the judiciary.
• Women Judges in India: Only one woman in the current Supreme Court bench; only one woman Chief Justice among 25 High Courts.
• Global Parallel: Over 40% of judges in UK and USA are women—India lags behind in parity compared to these global institutions.
• Judicial Reforms Context: Linked with Collegium reforms, National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) debate, and Article 50 (separation of judiciary from executive), all of which shape the regulatory landscape of the judiciary.

Causes Behind Gender Imbalance:

• Collegium Limitation: The Collegium system, dominated by senior judges, restricts entry for women and marginalized communities due to its elitist and network-based nature.
• Opaque Selection: The absence of transparent selection criteria reduces opportunities for meritorious women candidates to reach higher judicial positions.
• Social Barriers: Patriarchal norms and lack of mentorship networks often discourage women from pursuing higher judicial roles.
• Workplace Inadequacies: Poor infrastructure, including lack of separate restrooms and safety measures, discourages women’s participation, especially in district-level postings.
• Promotion Delays: Limited career progression and inconsistent promotion policies prevent women from moving up the judicial hierarchy.

Success at the Lower Judiciary Level:

• Competitive Examinations: The lower judiciary, selected through open competitive exams, ensures merit-based entry and equal opportunity for women and men.
• Higher Female Participation: Women now form nearly 38% of the lower judiciary, reflecting better inclusion where transparent examinations exist.
• Infrastructure Challenges: As per a 2023 Supreme Court Research and Planning report, 20% of district courts lack separate toilets for women, showing infrastructural gaps and the need for bridging the digital divide in judicial facilities.
• Potential for Growth: With better facilities and promotion opportunities, women’s representation can rise further at the district and sessions court levels.
• Merit Transparency Link: The success of women in the lower judiciary demonstrates how merit-based recruitment systems can overcome traditional gender biases and promote grassroots governance.

Proposal for an All-India Judicial Service (AIJS):

• Concept Origin: The idea of an All-India Judicial Service is gaining renewed attention to ensure a uniform, transparent, and competitive judicial recruitment process.
• Presidential Support: President Droupadi Murmu, in her 2023 Constitution Day address, endorsed AIJS as a means for merit-based and transparent judicial appointments.
• Inclusive Representation: Such a system could enhance participation from women, SCs, STs, OBCs, and EWS categories, diversifying the judiciary’s composition.
• Merit and Transparency: Open competition would minimize bias, nepotism, and regional favoritism, ensuring uniform standards nationwide.
• Resistance from Judiciary: Despite potential benefits, both the judiciary and Bar fear that such a system may dilute judicial independence and invite executive interference.

Addressing Concerns Over Judicial Autonomy:

• Autonomy Misconception: Critics argue that competitive recruitment might compromise judicial independence, but no such interference exists in Civil Services recruitment.
• Precedent of UPSC: The UPSC model has successfully conducted transparent, all-India examinations for decades without political bias.
• Safeguards Possible: Judicial independence can be protected if the Supreme Court supervises recruitment standards and evaluation processes.
• Transparency Gains: An open exam would ensure clear eligibility criteria, evaluation methods, and selection transparency.
• Social Equity: Competitive selection would democratize access, allowing women and marginalized groups equal entry into judicial services.

UPSC as a Model for Inclusivity:

• Successful Precedent: The UPSC Civil Services Exam demonstrates how competitive recruitment can diversify elite institutions.
• Diverse Representation: In 2024, out of 1,009 UPSC qualifiers, there were 318 OBCs, 160 SCs, 87 STs, and 109 EWS candidates.
• Women’s Success Story: 11 of the top 25 candidates were women, and both first and second ranks were secured by women—showing inclusivity through transparency.
• IPS Example: In 2024, 54 women joined the IPS, forming 28% of total recruits, reflecting gender balance achieved through open competition.
• Replicable Model: Adopting a similar UPSC-style model for judiciary can ensure diverse and meritocratic selection in higher courts.

Towards an Inclusive Judicial Future:

• Constitutional Provision: Article 312 empowers Parliament to establish All-India Services, including AIJS, ensuring uniform recruitment and service standards as part of the constitutional guidelines.
• Judicial Oversight: The proposed service could function under the control of the Supreme Court, ensuring judicial autonomy is maintained.
• UPSC-Linked Examination: The UPSC may conduct recruitment based on criteria finalized by the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• Comprehensive Training: Selected candidates should undergo structured judicial training, ensuring skill development and professional ethics.
• Public Confidence: Broader participation will enhance citizens’ faith in the judiciary as a representative and equitable institution.

Challenges:

• Institutional Resistance: Both the judiciary and Bar Councils oppose AIJS, fearing dilution of judicial independence.
• Implementation Complexity: Establishing a new recruitment framework requires coordination among Parliament, Supreme Court, and State governments.
• Infrastructure Gaps: Many court complexes lack gender-sensitive facilities, making workplace inclusion difficult and highlighting the need for bridging the digital divide in judicial infrastructure.
• Patriarchal Culture: Deep-seated social attitudes continue to limit women’s mobility and career aspirations in law.
• Limited Awareness: Many talented women lawyers lack access to mentorship, exposure, and resources needed to enter higher judicial roles.
• Lack of Political Priority: Despite support from the President and legal experts, AIJS implementation remains stalled due to limited political momentum.
• Transparency Concerns: Skepticism persists over whether new recruitment processes will be truly free from bias and external interference.
• Unequal Opportunities: Urban–rural disparities in legal education and exposure reduce women’s competitiveness in judicial exams.

Way Forward:

• Institutionalize AIJS: Parliament should operationalize All-India Judicial Service under Article 312, with oversight by the Supreme Court.
• Gender-Sensitive Reforms: Introduce gender quotas or reservation policies in higher judicial appointments to improve representation.
• Infrastructure Upgrade: Ensure all court complexes have separate restrooms, safety features, and childcare facilities for women, while also focusing on bridging the digital divide in judicial infrastructure.
• Transparent Selection: Adopt UPSC-like transparent processes for judicial recruitment to enhance diversity and meritocracy.
• Training and Mentorship: Establish a National Judicial Academy framework for continuous training and leadership development among women judges.
• Awareness Campaigns: Conduct nationwide outreach programs in law schools to encourage female participation in judicial careers, incorporating elements of civic education.
• Periodic Audits: Mandate annual gender diversity audits of courts to track progress and ensure accountability.
• Collaboration Model: Encourage civil society, academia, and judiciary collaboration to promote inclusivity and gender equity at all judicial levels.
• Participatory Governance: Implement mechanisms for greater public involvement in judicial processes to ensure accountability and transparency.

Conclusion:

A judiciary that reflects India’s diversity strengthens democracy. Introducing an All-India Judicial Service and ensuring gender-inclusive reforms can bridge the current disparity. Empowering women in the judiciary is not only a constitutional imperative but also a step toward making justice truly representative, impartial, and accessible to all citizens. This transformation is crucial in the context of the evolving global order and the need for robust local self-governance. By addressing these challenges, India can move towards an inclusive digital future where the judiciary plays a pivotal role in ensuring justice and equality for all.

Source: TH

Mains Practice Question:

“Despite progress in the lower judiciary, women remain severely underrepresented in India’s higher judiciary. Discuss the causes of this imbalance and evaluate whether establishing an All-India Judicial Service (AIJS) could help create a more inclusive, transparent, and merit-based judicial system in India.” (250 words)