Context

• The lack of gender diversity within India’s judiciary is a persistent issue that has significant implications on the fairness and inclusivity of the justice delivery system.
• Despite initiatives to increase women’s participation at entry levels, their representation at higher levels of the judiciary remains disappointingly low.
• Therefore, it is important to analyse the multifaceted nature of the gender gap in India's judiciary, including issues of entry, retention, structural inadequacies, and policy gaps.

An Analysis of Gender Disparity in Judicial Representation

• The gender imbalance within India’s judiciary begins at entry-level positions, although some improvements are evident.
• According to the Supreme Court of India’s State of the Judiciary report in 2023, women account for 36.3% of the district judiciary, and in 14 states, more than half of the new civil judges (junior division) are women.
• However, this progress fades at higher judicial levels, where, as of January 2024, only 13.4% of High Court judges and a mere 9.3% of Supreme Court judges are women.
• Moreover, this disparity is accentuated in certain states, such as Bihar, Chhattisgarh, and Tripura, where women’s representation is minimal or non-existent.
• Such skewed representation creates a funnel effect, restricting the pool of women qualified for elevation to higher courts and exacerbating the gender imbalance.

Reasons Behind Gender Imbalance in Judiciary

• Entry Level Barriers
  • Requirement for Continuous Practice
  • One significant regulatory obstacle is the requirement for continuous practice in some states for eligibility for judicial service positions.
  • Many states' Judicial Service Rules mandate that advocates must have a specific period of continuous, uninterrupted practice before being considered for elevation to the Bench.
  • This rule disproportionately impacts women, particularly those who may need to take career breaks due to family obligations, maternity, or childcare.
  • Unlike their male counterparts, women often struggle to meet this threshold due to a lack of systemic support for their family responsibilities.
• Absence of Maternity Benefits and Minimum Stipends
  • Maternity Benefits and Minimum Stipends; vital support systems for women in demanding professions are often absent or inadequate in the legal field.
  • Without paid maternity leave or financial support, many women are forced to choose between career advancement and family responsibilities.
  • This causes a significant drop-off in female representation before they even reach judicial roles.
  • For example, female advocates balancing family duties may struggle to maintain the continuity required by Judicial Service Rules, making the entry point into judicial positions a significant barrier in their career trajectory.
• Work Culture and Social Expectations
  • Apart from structural barriers, workplace culture and social expectations play a crucial role in shaping the experience of women in the judiciary.
  • The legal profession has historically been male-dominated, with deeply ingrained biases and cultural norms that are often unfavourable to women.
  • This is evident in everyday interactions within courts, where women frequently encounter subtle biases and, at times, overt discrimination.
  • For instance, in courtroom settings and professional gatherings, women judges, advocates, and staff may face challenges to their authority, unequal treatment, and stereotyping.
  • These issues make it harder for women to establish themselves as equals and earn the respect of their male peers.

Another Major Reason for Women’s Low Representation in Judiciary: Retention Challenges

• Unsupportive Policies
  • A key issue here is the unsupportive work environment, which fails to accommodate the needs of women, especially those with caregiving responsibilities.
  • Policies such as harsh transfer requirements illustrate how judiciary regulations often overlook the personal circumstances of female judges, making it difficult for them to maintain long-term stability in their roles.
  • Transfer policies are typically rigid, lacking any flexibility or consideration of family obligations.
  • Since women are still primarily responsible for family care in many cases, these policies add a heavy burden and deter many from continuing in the judiciary.
• Lack of Supportive Infrastructure
  • Another factor that complicates retention is the lack of supportive infrastructure within court premises, which negatively impacts women at all levels of the judiciary.
  • Court complexes across the country often lack basic amenities specifically designed for women.
  • For instance, according to a 2019 survey by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, nearly 100 district courts had no dedicated washrooms for women.
  • In higher courts as well, even women judge often face difficulties accessing adequate washroom facilities, let alone other female staff, lawyers, or litigants.
  • The absence of essentials like sanitary facilities and hygienic waste disposal systems not only affects physical comfort but also communicates a lack of consideration for women’s needs, reinforcing their sense of marginalization in the profession.
• Lack of Family-Friendly Amenities
  • Moreover, the lack of family-friendly amenities, such as feeding rooms and crèches, exacerbates the struggle for women balancing work and family life.
  • While some courts, such as the Delhi HC, have taken initial steps in providing a crèche facility, such resources are severely limited and often come with restrictive age limits, like catering only to children under six years.
  • This renders such amenities ineffective for many women with older children, who still require dependable childcare.

Ways Ahead to Address the Underrepresentation of Women in Judiciary

• Adoption of ‘Female Gaze’ in Policies
  • Adopting a female gaze in policymaking could bridge this gap, ensuring that women’s unique needs are prioritized.
  • Implementing a female gaze involves examining the judiciary’s policies and infrastructure through a feminist lens that recognises how ostensibly neutral regulations can inadvertently disadvantage women.
  • This approach challenges the male-centric perspective often inherent in judiciary committees and Bar Councils, which may lack female representation.
  • By using this lens, the judiciary can better address the gendered impact of policies and create a more inclusive environment for women.
• Prioritising Women’s Needs through Inclusive Policy
  • For effective inclusion of women in the judiciary, policies must be crafted with women’s specific challenges in mind.
  • Greater participation requires a shift towards women-centric perspectives that identify barriers to career growth.
  • For example, former Supreme Court Judge Justice Hima Kohli noted that unconscious gender biases in courts often sideline women in administrative duties.
  • Analysing High Court Building Committees reveals that only three HCs (Delhi, Allahabad, and Himachal Pradesh) have female members, highlighting the lack of representation in infrastructure-related decision-making.
• Increase Female Recruitment in Judicial Administration
  • Beyond infrastructure, a lack of representation in HC Registries and judicial academies worsens the neglect of gender-sensitive policies.
  • As a result, women’s experiences and needs are insufficiently reflected in policies or training programs designed to counter gender bias.
  • Implementing policies that are informed by women’s lived experiences; such as gender-sensitive recruitment, transfer protocols, and support for familial responsibilities, could prevent the marginalization of women in the judiciary.

Conclusion

• The underrepresentation of women in India’s judiciary reflects deeper systemic issues that extend beyond entry-level recruitment.
• Bridging this gap requires a comprehensive overhaul of the judiciary’s policies, infrastructure, and culture to be more inclusive and gender-sensitive.
• Recognising and addressing women’s unique needs through the female gaze would mitigate the unintended impacts of neutral policies and foster an equitable work environment.