Context:

• The appointment of Justice V. Mohana as a judge of the Supreme Court marks a significant milestone in India’s judicial history.
• She is only the second woman advocate to be directly elevated from the Bar to the Supreme Court, after Justice Indu Malhotra (2018).
• Despite this achievement, women remain severely underrepresented in India’s higher judiciary, necessitating structural reforms to ensure gender equality.

Persistent Gender Gap in the Higher Judiciary:

• Women’s journey to the highest levels of the legal profession has been marked by systemic barriers.
• Direct appointments from the Bar:
  • The Supreme Court has directly appointed nine male judges from the Bar, many of whom enjoyed long tenures.
  • Some, such as Justice S.M. Sikri and Justice U.U. Lalit, became Chief Justices of India (CJI).
  • Current judges Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice K.V. Viswanathan are also expected to become CJIs.
  • In contrast, Justice Indu Malhotra, the first woman directly elevated from the Bar, served for less than three years and never became part of the Collegium.
• This reflects the limited opportunities available to women for meaningful representation and leadership within the judiciary.

Global Best Practices for Gender Representation:

• Several countries have introduced constitutional or legal mechanisms to ensure gender balance in their apex courts.
• Belgium:
  • In 2014, Belgium amended Article 34(5) of the Special Act of 1989 governing its Constitutional Court.
  • The amendment mandates that at least one-third of judges must belong to each gender.
  • Until the quota is achieved, after every two male appointments, the third appointment must be a woman.
  • The court also follows linguistic and professional representation quotas.
• South Africa:
  • Section 174(2) of the Constitution requires the judiciary to reflect the country’s racial and gender composition.
  • The Constitutional Court currently has 6 women out of 11 judges and is headed by a woman Chief Justice.
  • It is among the world’s first women-majority constitutional courts.

Representation Quotas - Not a New Concept:

• The representation-based appointments already exist in India.
• For example, Supreme Court appointments often consider regional representation from different High Courts.
• Recent judicial appointments have factored in such geographical diversity.
• Therefore, introducing a gender-based quota would not be conceptually unprecedented.
• The argument is that if regional representation is accepted as a legitimate criterion, gender representation should also receive institutional recognition.

India’s Poor Record on Women’s Representation:

• Despite Justice Mohana’s appointment, women remain grossly underrepresented in the Supreme Court.
• Current status: Only 2 women judges out of 37 judges, constituting merely 5.4% of the Supreme Court’s strength.
• International comparison: South Africa have 54.5% of women Judges in apex Court, Canada (50%), Belgium (50%), Germany (50%), US (44.4%), Australia (42.85%), France (33.33%), Singapore (~24%), Nepal (~17%), and UK (~17%).
• India lags significantly behind both developed and developing democracies in ensuring gender diversity in its highest court. 

Suggested Reforms:

• Constitutional amendments:
  • Amend Article 124 (Establishment and appointment of judges of the Supreme Court) and Article 217 (Appointment and conditions of judges of High Courts).
  • This will mandate that judicial appointments reflect the gender and social composition of Indian society, ensuring representation of women, minority communities, SCs, STs, and OBCs.
• Judicial policy on gender representation: Until constitutional amendments are enacted, the Supreme Court should adopt a written policy committing itself to 33.3% women judges.
• Targeted appointment mechanism: India could emulate Belgium’s model -
  • After every two male appointments, the next appointment must be a woman.
  • Continue this process until one-third representation is achieved.

Conclusion:

• Justice V. Mohana’s elevation is an important symbolic and institutional However, the appointment of a few individual women judges cannot substitute for systemic gender inclusion.
• With women comprising only 5.4% of the Supreme Court, India remains far behind global standards.
• Achieving meaningful representation requires a clear roadmap involving constitutional reforms, institutional commitment, and targeted appointments.
• Gender-balanced courts are not merely a matter of representation but are essential for strengthening the legitimacy, inclusiveness, and democratic character of the judiciary.