logo
#

Latest news with #RituparnaPatgiri

Women in judiciary: A mountain to climb
Women in judiciary: A mountain to climb

Indian Express

time20-05-2025

  • Politics
  • Indian Express

Women in judiciary: A mountain to climb

— Rituparna Patgiri (The Indian Express has launched a new series of articles for UPSC aspirants written by seasoned writers and scholars on issues and concepts spanning History, Polity, International Relations, Art, Culture and Heritage, Environment, Geography, Science and Technology, and so on. Read and reflect with subject experts and boost your chance of cracking the much-coveted UPSC CSE. In the following article, Rituparna Patgiri discusses the significance of gender diversity in judiciary.) Justice Leila Seth was sitting in the Delhi High Court one day when she heard some shuffling of feet and the soft murmur of many voices. She enquired from her reader whether any specially newsworthy case had suddenly been assigned to her. He replied: 'Oh no, no. This crowd is a group of farmers whom Prime Minister Charan Singh has invited to Delhi to see the sights. They have just visited the zoo: and now they have come to see the woman judge in the Delhi High Court.' Justice Leila Seth – the first woman Chief Justice of a state High Court (Himachal Pradesh) – recalls this incident from 1978 in her autobiography, On Balance. The curiosity to 'see' what a woman judge 'looked like' highlights how unusual it was to see a woman in such a position of judicial authority. Four decades later, India has yet to see a woman Chief Justice of the Supreme Court while the number of women judges in the apex court has also been very low. Since its establishment in 1950, the Supreme Court has had only 11 women judges. The first woman judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M. Fathima Beevi, was appointed in 1989 – 39 years after the court came into being. At present, there are only two women judges – Justice Bela Trivedi and Justice B. V. Nagarathna – out of the total 33, including the Chief Justice. Justice Trivedi is retiring on June 9, but Friday (May 16, 2025) marked her last working day. However, her retirement took an unexpected turn as the Supreme Court Bar Association didn't hold the traditional official farewell ceremony for her. Notably, after Justice Trivedi's retirement, the number of women judges would be reduced to only one. The situation is not much better even in the High Courts and the lower courts. According to the data from the Supreme Court Observer (2021), only 11.7% of judges in High Courts are women. Manipur, Meghalaya, Tripura, Patna and Uttarakhand High Courts have no women judges. In the lower courts, women judges only account for 35%. These figures underline that gender imbalance exists across all levels of the judicial system. Moreover, viewed through an inter-sectional lens, the picture appears more troubling. In the last 75 years, there has been no Dalit or tribal woman judge in the Supreme Court. Justice M. Fathima Beevi has been the first – and so far, the only – Muslim woman judge of the Supreme Court. Currently, there are no women in the Supreme Court collegium – a system for the appointment and transfer of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts. Though it is not a Constitutional provision, the collegium system has evolved through judgments of the Supreme Court itself. It consists of the Chief Justice of India and four senior judges from the apex court. Only two women judges — Justice Ruma Pal and Justice R. Banumathi — have been a part of the collegium. Adequate representation of women in the Supreme Court collegium would perhaps help increase the number of women judges. A 2025 report by the Centre for Law and Policy Research (CLPR), Bengaluru, found that women judges in the Supreme Court serve one year less than their men counterparts on average. This shorter tenure affected their chances of rising to the senior positions, and subsequently, to the collegium. For instance, Justice B. V. Nagarathna is poised to become the first woman Chief Justice of India. But her tenure will only last for 36 days. The lack of gender diversity and women's under-representation in the judiciary often lead to judgments that reinforce existing patriarchal biases. It is visible in some of the recent judgments from the Allahabad High Court. For instance, on March 11, 2025, the Allahabad High Court granted bail in an alleged rape case and said that the woman had 'herself invited trouble and was also responsible for the same'. Similarly, on March 17, 2025, the court passed an order, involving a minor and two men, and said that grabbing breasts and breaking the strings of the girl's pyjamas were not sufficient to hold the charges of rape or attempt to rape. The Supreme Court had to intervene in both of these cases. These judgments have been criticised as 'insensitive' and 'inhuman'. Justice Bela Trivedi's remark that 'we should empower women through law, not sympathy' is particularly relevant here. Such judgements perhaps need to be seen in relation to the women's presence in the judiciary. In August 2022, the district and sessions judge at Kozhikode, cited the 'revealing and provocative dress' of the complainant as a valid ground to grant anticipatory bail to the accused in a molestation case. Again in 2022, the Bombay High Court ruled that the accused is a young boy and he was 'smitten by infatuation' while granting bail in the rape case of a minor. Judgments like these not only reinforce patriarchal beliefs but also deny justice to the victims and survivors. Therefore, it may be argued that appointments of women to the judiciary at all levels need to be normalised. Women need to have space to work as individuals – rather than being seen as symbolic representatives or torchbearers for all women. At the same time, it is also important that women judges are not confined to adjudicating only on women's issues. Spending efforts towards gender sensitisation and enhancing accountability could be a step in the right direction. Some states like Jharkhand, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Telangana and Bihar have reservations for women. But these measures seem insufficient. In addition to affirmative actions, some infrastructural improvements — such as better sanitation and toilet facilities, particularly in lower courts — would be crucial in encouraging more women to enter the judiciary. Moreover, regular surveys that take account of women's intersectional representation in the judiciary may also be conducted. Such data will be critical in addressing women's under-representation in the judiciary. Lastly, normalising women's participation in the judiciary is important for a more inclusive and representative legal system. Why is the under-representation of women in the Supreme Court and the judiciary considered problematic for gender justice in India? The lack of gender diversity and women's under-representation in the judiciary often lead to judgments that reinforce existing patriarchal biases. Evaluate. Justice Bela Trivedi said that 'we should empower women through law, not sympathy'. Comment. What role do infrastructure and basic facilities in lower courts play in enabling or discouraging women's participation in the judiciary? (Rituparna Patgiri is an Assistant Professor at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Guwahati.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store