Gender Imbalance in Supreme Court: Causes, Challenges, and Solutions
Context:
- With the retirement of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in August 2025, the Supreme Court of India now has only one woman judge, Justice B.V. Nagarathna, out of 34 judges.
- This situation highlights a severe gender imbalance, raising questions about diversity, inclusivity, and representation in India’s apex court.
Understanding Gender Imbalance:
- Definition: Gender imbalance refers to the gross under-representation of women judges in the Supreme Court, despite constitutional guarantees of equality under Articles 14, 15, and 16.
- Current Status:
- Since 1950, only 11 women judges (3.8%) out of 287 have been appointed.
- The first woman judge, Justice Fathima Beevi, was appointed in 1989.
- Women judges are often appointed late in their careers, limiting their tenure and chances to become Chief Justice of India (CJI).
Causes of Gender Imbalance:
- Structural Barriers: Collegium system lacks institutionalised diversity criteria; gender is rarely prioritised.
- Societal Factors: Gender stereotypes in the legal profession discourage women from leadership roles.
- Institutional Inertia: Late elevation of women judges limits tenure and prevents entry into the Collegium.
- Barriers from the Bar: Few women Senior Advocates are elevated directly to the Supreme Court (Justice Indu Malhotra being the only example).
- Opaque Processes: Collegium lacks transparency, making appointments discretionary and exclusionary.
Challenges in Correcting Gender Imbalance:
- Opaque Collegium System: No written policy on diversity; reasons for appointments not disclosed.
- Seniority & Tenure Limitations: Women are often elevated late, leaving minimal time in senior positions.
- Male-Dominated Legal Culture: Resistance in High Courts and the Bar reduces the pipeline of women to the Supreme Court.
- Lack of Political & Institutional Will: Gender is not treated as an appointment criterion, unlike caste, region, or religion.
- Absence of Accountability: No monitoring mechanism exists to ensure gender diversity in the higher judiciary.
Implications of Gender Imbalance:
On Judiciary:
- Narrow Perspectives: Lack of diverse viewpoints reduces inclusivity in judgments.
- Weaker Legitimacy: Public trust undermined as the Court does not reflect society.
- Missed Jurisprudential Growth: Women bring lived experiences that enrich interpretation of rights, especially in gender justice and workplace equality.
- Limited Leadership: Late appointments deny women opportunities to serve as CJI or influence Collegium decisions.
On Society:
- Trust Deficit: Citizens may question judiciary’s commitment to equality.
- Discouragement for Women Lawyers: Fewer role models reduce motivation for aspiring women lawyers.
- Undermining Constitutional Morality: Violates Articles 14 and 15, promoting substantive equality.
- Democratic Deficit: A judiciary that does not mirror India’s gender diversity weakens representative legitimacy.
Way Forward:
Institutional Reforms:
- Collegium resolutions must mandate gender diversity as a criterion.
- Introduce transparent criteria for appointments with public disclosure of reasons.
Pipeline Development:
- Increase appointments of women judges in High Courts.
- Encourage women from the Bar through structured mentorship and reservation in judicial services.
Policy & Ethical Anchoring:
- Adopt a written diversity policy for the higher judiciary (as suggested by 2nd ARC).
- Embed constitutional morality and substantive equality in judicial appointments.
Global Lessons:
- Countries like Canada and the UK actively pursue diversity in top courts.
- India can adopt institutionalised approaches to improve representation.
Conclusion:
- The credibility of the Supreme Court as the custodian of equality depends not only on its judgments but also on its composition.
- Bridging the gender gap is not tokenism; it is a constitutional and ethical imperative.
- A judiciary that reflects the diversity of society will strengthen public trust, enrich jurisprudence, and ensure inclusive justice.
Source : The Hindu
