The case centers on a plea by a woman advocate, who contends that the male-dominated bar has left women underrepresented in its ranks, particularly at higher levels of practice. She argues that systemic barriers prevent women from ascending to prominent positions, and the introduction of reservation could provide an essential remedy. The petitioner has highlighted disparities in access to opportunities, mentorship, and promotion within the legal profession as key factors contributing to the skewed gender ratio in top legal circles.
However, the Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, expressed reservations about the idea of reservations within the legal community. During hearings, the justices questioned the legal justification behind the request, emphasizing that the judiciary’s independence and meritocracy must remain intact. They also pointed out that the legal profession, unlike other sectors, is based on an individual’s skill, ability, and experience, and not merely on social or demographic representation.
The court’s skepticism stems from concerns that implementing quotas could potentially undermine the competence-based framework of the legal system. Justices also debated whether such a step would open the door to similar demands from other professional sectors, where reservation might not be appropriate or in line with established standards.
Women’s representation in the Indian legal profession remains a contentious issue, with women accounting for only a small fraction of senior advocates and judges. Data indicates that while more women are entering the legal field at the undergraduate level, their numbers drop significantly as they progress in their careers. Factors such as long working hours, societal expectations, and a lack of supportive infrastructure for women, such as adequate maternity leave or flexible working hours, have contributed to the gender gap.
In recent years, there has been growing debate over the lack of women in India’s higher judiciary, with critics pointing to the absence of female judges in the Supreme Court and lower courts. Despite efforts to increase gender diversity, such as the elevation of more women to high-ranking legal positions, the progress has been slow. The Supreme Court has been criticized for the disproportionately low number of women judges, which has led to calls for reforms to ensure that gender diversity is reflected in the judiciary. The petition for reservation is, in many ways, an extension of this broader conversation on gender equality within India’s legal system.
Legal experts are divided over the matter. Some support the idea of a reservation system, pointing to the broader benefits of affirmative action in other sectors. They argue that gender-based reservation could rectify the power imbalance in the legal field and pave the way for more women to assume leadership roles. Advocates of the petition highlight that despite meritocracy being a core principle in law, equal access to opportunities is still far from a reality for many women, especially those from marginalized backgrounds.
On the other hand, critics argue that the introduction of reservations in the legal profession could erode the principle of merit, which is crucial to maintaining the integrity of the justice system. They contend that legal practitioners must be judged solely on their ability and expertise, not on their gender or any other demographic factors. Several senior lawyers have expressed concerns that implementing quotas could dilute the competence required to argue cases effectively, potentially leading to a decline in the quality of legal services.
The case also raises questions about how affirmative action policies, which have been implemented in education and public sector jobs, could be adapted to the legal profession. Unlike other fields, where reservations are implemented in the form of quotas for specific groups, the bar is based on a highly individualistic structure. There is no clear precedent for the implementation of gender-based quotas in the legal profession, making it a particularly contentious issue for both legal practitioners and policymakers.
For many, the petition underscores the ongoing challenges that women face in the workplace, especially in male-dominated professions like law. While significant progress has been made in promoting women’s rights and gender equality in various sectors, the legal field remains an area where change has been slow and uneven. The Supreme Court’s response to this petition will likely have far-reaching implications, not just for the legal profession but for broader discussions on gender-based affirmative action in India.