Justice BV Nagarathna said during the Dr. Rajendra Prasad Memorial Lecture at CNLU Patna that a three-year Bar practice is essential, rejecting claims it deters women, as real courtroom experience builds the maturity and skills needed for judges.
Justice B. V. Nagarathna, a Supreme Court judge, urged concrete institutional reforms to correct the gender imbalance in the legal profession.
She recommended that women should make up at least 30 per cent of law officers in both the central and state governments, as well as 30 per cent of panel advocates in public sector organisations, to ensure their continued participation and visibility in litigation.
Stressing that such representation is vital for women lawyers to stay actively engaged in practice, she said,
“30 per cent of the law officers of the central government and 30 per cent of the law officers of the state government must be women. And 30 per cent of the panel advocates in public sector organisations must be women,”
ALSO READ: Institutions Like ECI Should Function Independently: Justice BV Nagarathna
Justice Nagarathna made the remarks while addressing a question from a law student and directing it to the advocate general during the Dr. Rajendra Prasad Memorial Lecture at Chanakya National Law University (CNLU), Patna.
The lecture entitled “Constitutionalism beyond Rights: Why Structure Matters” considered how the Constitution’s longevity relies on the distribution and restraint of power. Also present were Supreme Court Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and CNLU Vice-Chancellor Faizan Mustafa, among others.
She rejected the argument that the minimum three-year practice requirement for entry into the judicial service would deter women candidates, arguing that time at the Bar is crucial to developing the competence needed for the bench. Practical courtroom experience, she said, gives prospective judges the maturity and skills required to deliver justice effectively.
She remarked,
“I disagree with you Sir. Next year, I will be completing 40 years in the Bar. I have so many things to learn. If students who come from the bench of the classroom to the bench of the Court hall, they are losing out on experience- please don’t think losing three years is a loss of life. I am learning still at 40…If the student is not able to stand before a judge and make an argument, seeking a relief, how will you, as a judge, grant relief? Don’t think the three year of life is lost. That is a very negative attitude you have.”
She further added,
“A District Judge can give a death penalty but imagine if we appoint somebody who is 30 years with lack of experience and he starts giving death penalty in all POCSO cases because there is a death penalty provided and so many references in the High Court, what happens to our judicial system? All this is in order to save our judicial system in the country, that we want maturity in our judges. Maturity comes with experience.”
On concerns about the “Master of the Roster” convention, Justice Nagarathna clarified that the Chief Justice’s authority ends once a matter is allocated to a bench, and that judicial independence rests with the individual judge.
She added,
“Did anybody predict I would dissent in so many cases?”
Justice Nagarathna said that in the end it depends on the conviction, independence, and courage of the judge assigned the case.
She noted that the limited presence of women judges and advocates is frequently tied to the multiple responsibilities women bear within families, commenting,
“The reason is, the dual role the woman has to play. If she takes up a career in law, she also has her household to look after.”
Justice Nagarathna criticized the view held by some law students that practicing for three years is a waste of time, stressing that this period is crucial for gaining practical skills that will serve them well in judicial careers.
Justice Nagarathna concluded by urging law students to concentrate on honing their professional skills and warned against overreliance on artificial intelligence tools when drafting pleadings.