
women judges in the Supreme Court are fewer in number and have shorter tenures
With the retirement of Justice Abhay S. Oka on May 24, 2025, the strength of the Supreme Court is now at 31, from a sanctioned strength of 34 judges. Only two female judges are part of the full bench at present, of which Justice Bela M. Trivedi is set to retire on June 9, 2025, her last working day being May 16, 2025. That leaves Justice B.V. Nagarathna as the lone woman judge in the top court.
In fact, until now, there have been only 11 female Supreme Court judges, which accounts for just 4% of a total of 279 judges who have presided over the Supreme Court of India since January 28, 1950, when the Court came into being.
Viewing the tenures of these 11 judges, what is evident is that at any given time, the Supreme Court has never had more than four women justices. In fact, the very first instance of the Supreme Court having more than one woman judge at the same time was on 13 September, 2011, when Justice Ranjana P. Desai was elevated to the apex Court while Justice Gyan Sudha Misra was active (she had been a Supreme Court justice since April 30, 2010). This lasted until April 27, 2014, when Justice Gyan Sudha Misra retired.
As shown in the graphic below, it would not be until August 7, 2018 when the Supreme Court would comprise of three female judges for the first time. This lasted for almost two years, until Justice R. Banumathi's retirement on July 19, 2020.
Just over a year later, on August 31, 2021, the Supreme Court would comprise of four female judges for the first time: Justice Indira Banerjee, Justice Hima Kohli, Justice B.V. Nagarathna, and Justice Bela M. Trivedi.
The top Court is yet to see five female judges at the same time.
Higher age of appointment of female judges
The median age appointment of female judges is 61, whereas that of male judges is 59, as shown in the graphic below where each point represents a judge.
Judges of the Supreme Court must retire upon attaining the age of 65, as per Article 124 of the Constitution of India. With the median age of appointment of female judges and male judges differing, their tenures in the Supreme Court also differ. Female judges spend around six months less than male counterparts who are not elevated to the Chief Justice of India. The tenure of female judges is four years lesser than male judges who were elevated to the Chief Justice of India, as shown in the graphic below.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Court dismisses bail plea of travel vlogger held for spying
A local court in Haryana's Hisar on Wednesday dismissed the bail application of travel vlogger Jyoti Rani, who was arrested over three weeks ago on charges of spying and passing on secret information to Pakistani intelligence operatives. Moving the bail application in the court of Judicial Magistrate Sunil Kumar, Ms. Rani's counsel, Kumar Mukesh, had argued that the FIR in the case was based on the interrogation of the accused prior to her arrest and was 'liable to be quashed, as it in violation of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India'. Opposing her bail plea, the police contended that the accused, if released, could influence the investigation.


The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
OBC quota deadlock dominates politics in West Bengal; new list an appeasement move, says BJP
The deadlock over the Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation continues to dominate politics in West Bengal with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership accusing the State government of 'appeasement politics' on Wednesday, a day after Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that'backwardness'wasthe only benchmark to decide OBC categories. Addressing the State Assembly while tabling the annual report of the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes for the financial year 2024-25,the Chief Minister had said on Tuesday that a commission set up by the government is holding a survey on 50 new subsections for inclusion in the category. The Calcutta High Court in May 2024 had struck down the OBC reservation awarded to 77 categories, highlighting a complete lack of legislative policy within the 2012 scheme to classify any group as OBC. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court. On March 19, 2025, the State government told the Supreme Court that it would complete the fresh OBC survey within three months. Since the fresh list of OBC reservation is not available, the admission to colleges in the State has not started almost a month after results of Higher Secondary Examinations have been declared. The State government on Tuesday also tabled in the Assembly an interim report on the new OBC list for reservations. 'One-sided benefits' Reacting to the developments, Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari took to social media and said, 'If this reservation list is not prepared with the intention of providing 'one-sided benefits' exclusively to Muslims, by deliberately depriving Hindus and other communities, then the sun rises in the west.' Meanwhile, State Education Minister Bratya Basu has assured that there will be no disruption in the academic calender due to the OBC reservation list.


Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Quota sub-categorisation ensures marginalised get their share: CJI B R Gavai
NEW DELHI: Nearly a year after penning the seven-judge Supreme Court bench's majority view favouring sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste quota, India's second Dalit CJI B R Gavai has said the ruling ensured that the most backward among Dalits got a fair share in public employment and admissions to govt educational institutions. Speaking at the Oxford Union on 'From Representation to Realisation: Embodying the Constitution's Promise' on Tuesday night, CJI Gavai stepped into the rare zone of a judge explaining his judgment in public. The seven-judge bench judgment, authored by Justice Gavai, had on Aug 1 last year permitted states to sub-categorise castes within SC communities based on socio-economic backwardness and the degree of under-representation in govt jobs to ensure that the larger pie of 15% quota went to the most backward. The court had asked govts to devise suitable criteria to bar the 'creamy layer' among the SCs from availing reservation. The logic behind the court's suggestion for keeping out the 'creamy layer' was that the children of civil servants and others from among the SCs, who had moved up on the socio-economic ladder and received good education, were not deserving of quotas. In his speech, CJI Gavai said the apex court's decision to uphold the principle of sub-classification within quotas for SCs "was not to question the relevance or success of reservations, but to ensure that the most marginalised within marginalised groups receive their fair share". He said many decades ago, millions of citizens of India were called untouchables, but the country had marched ahead and "here we are today, where a person belonging to those very (untouchable) people is speaking openly, as the holder of the highest office in the judiciary of the country". "This is what the Constitution of India did. It told the people of India that they belong, that they can speak for themselves, and that they have an equal place in every sphere of society and power," he said, adding that it was possible because the prime architect of the Constitution, Dr B R Ambedkar, made inclusivity and equality the bedrock of constitutional values and guarantees.