Representation not enough if women judges cannot be provided sensitive work environment, guidance, rules Supreme Court reinstating two women civil judges

IN a remarkable judgment delivered on February 28, 2025 by a multi-gendered bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N. Kotiswar Singh, the Court addressed the issues faced by female officers within the Indian judiciary.

While acknowledging that having women in the judiciary makes it more inclusive, the Court observed that there is room for improvement in making the system more enabling for these women officers and sensitive to the problems they experience, which are widely different from those experienced by their male counterparts.

“It is not enough to find comfort solely in the growing number of female judicial officers if we are unable to ensure for them a sensitive work environment and guidance”, the judgment authored by Justice Nagarathna states.

It discusses the physical, emotional, and psychological difficulties faced by women, which are not necessarily appreciated while grading their performance as judges. It also highlights that the judicial system must account for the anxieties and difficulties faced by women in judicial services.

While pronouncing the judgement, Justice Nagarathna orally remarked that there is a need to realise and be more sensitive towards the fact that some women judges have to take painkillers to be able to sit from morning till evening on certain days of the month.

The judgment also elaborates on the physical and emotional effects that a miscarriage has on a woman—

“Psychological consequences (of a miscarriage) include an increase in the risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, sometimes leading to suicides…the psychological and social effects may be more severe and long lasting. A miscarriage affects a person’s identity, leading to disappointments and challenges to motherhood identity and role, stigma and isolation, amongst other aspects.”

The observations were made in reference to the case of one of the terminated officers, Aditi Kumar Sharma, who had suffered a miscarriage while in service, which adversely affected her performance in the evaluation year of 2021.

The judgement clarifies that gender is not a rescue for poor performance. Rather, it is a critical consideration that must be weighed for holistic decision-making at certain times and stages for women judicial officers.

How the proceedings got initiated

The issue arose when, on May 23, 2023, the services of six female judicial officers of the Madhya Pradesh state judicial services (Civil Judges, Junior Division) were terminated by the Madhya Pradesh government on the recommendation of the Administrative Committee of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which was approved by the Full Court by circulation on May 13, 2023.