The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of increasing female representation in the judiciary, suggesting it would significantly enhance the quality of judicial decision-making. This declaration came as part of a ruling on Friday, where the court reinstated two female judicial officers in Madhya Pradesh whose services had been terminated in May 2023.
Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N. Kotiswar Singh presided over the bench that labeled the termination of the officers as “punitive and arbitrary.” They ordered their reinstatement within 15 days and discussed the broader implications of gender diversity in the judiciary during their 125-page judgment.
Justice Nagarathna, who penned the verdict, underscored the challenges women face in the judiciary, highlighting the physical and psychological hardships, including the use of pain medication to endure long workdays. The verdict stressed that recognizing and accommodating these challenges is crucial for creating a sensitive and inclusive work environment.
The bench argued that a judiciary reflective of society’s diversity could better address varied social and individual experiences. “Increasing the representation of women not only enhances decision-making quality but also influences societal attitudes towards gender roles,” Justice Nagarathna noted. The presence of women in judiciary roles is seen as a pathway to their greater representation in other decision-making bodies, including legislative and executive branches.
Moreover, the verdict highlighted the potential impact of more female judges on women’s willingness to pursue justice and assert their rights through the legal system. It referenced Article 10 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, advocating for special protection for mothers before and after childbirth, emphasizing that freedom from discrimination and equal protection under the law are essential rights for women, particularly during pregnancy and maternity.
The judgment also touched on the severe impacts of miscarriage, including the increased risks of anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder, sometimes leading to suicide. It pointed out the long-term physical and psychological effects, including challenges to a woman’s identity and motherhood role, stigma, and social isolation.
Addressing the specific case of the two judicial officers, the court stated that while gender should not shield poor performance, it is a vital factor that should be considered in decision-making processes, particularly at critical times in a woman’s career.
