Gender equity in courts

Source: The post “Gender equity in courts” has been created, based on “The road to gender equity in courts” published in “The Hindu” on 16 October 2025. Gender equity in courts.

UPSC Syllabus: GS Paper 2 – Polity- Judiciary

Context: Women’s under-representation in India’s higher judiciary remains a persistent and serious concern. According to the India Justice Report 2025, women constitute only 14% of judges in the High Courts and a mere 3.1% in the Supreme Court. Among the 34 judges of the Supreme Court, only one is a woman, highlighting the severe gender imbalance at the top of the judicial hierarchy. This lack of representation undermines the constitutional vision of equality, diversity, and inclusiveness in India’s justice system.

Status of Women in Judiciary

1. High Courts: Out of 25 High Courts, only one is headed by a woman Chief Justice.
2. Supreme Court: There is only one woman judge, and unless another is appointed soon, India will have a Supreme Court without a single woman judge before the expected elevation of the current woman judge as the first woman Chief Justice of India.
3. Lower Judiciary: The situation is comparatively better; nearly 38% of judges in the subordinate judiciary are women.
4. According to a 2023 report by the Centre for Research and Planning of the Supreme Court, around 20% of district court complexes have separate toilets for women, indicating poor infrastructure that also hinders women’s professional growth.

Reasons for Gender Imbalance

1. Collegium System of Appointment: The current system of judicial appointments in High Courts and the Supreme Court through the Collegium is an elitist and closed network. It limits entry to those within select professional and social circles, disadvantaged women and underprivileged groups.
2. Lack of Institutional Mechanism for Diversity: There is no structured policy to ensure gender balance in appointments to higher courts. The process is opaque and based on subjective recommendations, rather than merit-based open competition.
3. Social and Structural Barriers: Women lawyers face challenges such as bias, lack of mentorship, and unequal work opportunities in the legal profession. Limited facilities, safety issues, and poor work-life balance discourage many from pursuing higher judicial positions.

Need for Reform

1. There is an urgent need to make the judicial selection process more transparent, inclusive, and merit-based.
2. Similar to recruitment in IAS, IPS, and IFS, there should be a national-level competitive examination for judicial appointments.
3. Such a process would reduce biases, nepotism, and patronage, while ensuring diversity and equal opportunity.
4. The All-India Judicial Service (AIJS) has been suggested by several stakeholders, including the President of India, Droupadi Murmu, who in her Constitution Day address (2023) proposed the creation of this service to ensure fairness and inclusivity in recruitment.

UPSC as a Model

1. The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) model demonstrates how competitive examinations can bring transparency and diversity in recruitment.
2. For example, among the UPSC Civil Services 2024 results, 11 out of the top 25 candidates were women, showing improved gender representation.
3. The Civil Services have also witnessed greater social and regional diversity, with candidates from OBC, SC, ST, and economically weaker backgrounds achieving top ranks.
4. A similar system for the judiciary would help broaden representation and ensure merit-based selection.

Concerns and Counterarguments

1. Critics argue that an All-India Judicial Service may undermine the independence of the judiciary and invite executive interference.
2. However, the article clarifies that if such recruitment is conducted by the UPSC, based on standards prescribed by the Supreme Court in consultation with High Courts, judicial independence can be preserved.
3. A uniform, merit-based recruitment system would, in fact, strengthen transparency and accountability in judicial appointments.

Way Forward

1. Constitutional Backing: Article 312 of the Constitution already empowers Parliament to create All-India Services, including an All-India Judicial Service.
2. Transparent Selection: Recruitment should be open to all eligible Indians and conducted by an independent constitutional body such as UPSC, with judicial oversight.
3. Inclusivity and Diversity: The system must ensure representation of women, minorities, and marginalized groups through fair and inclusive criteria.
4. Training and Professional Development: Selected judges should undergo structured induction and training to ensure judicial competence and ethical integrity.
5. Gender-Friendly Infrastructure: Improving court infrastructure, providing safe workplaces and better amenities for women, will encourage more women to join and remain in the judiciary.

Conclusion: Justice and equality are too vital to be left to a limited few; the judiciary must reflect the diversity of the society it serves.Establishing a transparent, merit-based, and inclusive judicial selection process through an All-India Judicial Service is the most effective way to ensure gender equity and institutional integrity in India’s higher judiciary.

Question: In the light of this statement, critically examine the proposal for establishing an All-India Judicial Service (AIJS) as a means to ensure transparency, diversity, and gender equity in judicial appointments.