The Supreme Court of India overturned the dismissal of two women judicial officers from Madhya Pradesh, highlighting the necessity of addressing gender-specific challenges in the judiciary. The verdict, delivered on February 28, underscores the importance of creating a supportive work environment that acknowledges the difficulties faced by women judicial officers.

"While gender is not a rescue for poor performance, it is a critical condition which may weigh for holistic decision-making for certain times and stature of women judicial officers,"

observed a bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice NK Singh.

The Court brought attention to the personal struggles of one of the dismissed officers, who suffered a miscarriage during her probation period. This not only led to severe physical pain but also took a toll on her mental health. Additionally, she had to endure the distress of her brother being diagnosed with blood cancer and subsequently contracted COVID-19 herself. Despite these significant challenges, her performance assessment report (ACR) was downgraded without due consideration of these hardships.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Affirms Right to Interest as Compensation: Doctrine of Restitution Explained

The judgment strongly advocated for a more empathetic approach towards evaluating women judicial officers, considering their unique struggles. The bench emphasized that disregarding such aspects could lead to unfair dismissals and hinder the broader goal of achieving gender parity in the judiciary.

Justice Nagarathna, who authored the judgment, stressed that merely increasing the number of women in the judiciary is not sufficient if they are not provided with a sensitive and conducive work environment.

"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 stated.

The Supreme Court recognized that a higher representation of women in the judiciary not only enhances the quality of decision-making but also contributes to gender equality in the legal profession. A diverse judiciary ensures a more balanced and just approach, particularly in cases involving women.

The Reality of Women in the Judiciary

Following the pronouncement of the order, Justice Nagarathna made a strong remark on the often-overlooked struggles of women judicial officers.

"This judgment gave us an opportunity to say how women judicial officers have to be treated. You must talk to them. They take tablets to kill pain on certain days of the month to be able to sit from morning to evening. So, this must be realized. There must be some sensitiveness."

Read Also:- Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Stand on Compensation for COVID-19 Vaccine-Related Deaths

She further elaborated on the challenges faced by one of the officers:

"When she explained—first of all, COVID—she was hospitalized. Her brother has blood cancer. She herself had a miscarriage. Newly married. She went to a vacant court. How difficult it is to revive a vacant court! Notices have to be issued, witnesses have to be called and examined. And then to say, 'look, you have not performed, your disposal is low, pendency is high, therefore, we will remove you from the system'—this cannot be done."

To be updated after the judgment is uploaded.

Case Details: ADITI KUMAR SHARMA v STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 233/2024 & SARITA CHOUDHARY v. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 142/2024 & IN RE: TERMINATION OF CIVIL JUDGE, CLASS-II (JR. DIVISION) MADHYA PRADESH STATE JUDICIAL SERVICE., SMW(C) No. 2/2023

Appearances: Senior Advocate Indira Jaising (for Aditi) Senior Advocate R Basant (for Sarita), Senior Advocate Gaurav Agarwal (Amicus) and AOR Arjun Garg (for Madhya Pradesh High Court)