The Supreme Court has issued notice on a PIL seeking reservation for women advocates in State Bar Councils, aiming to address their under-representation in bar leadership and promote gender equality within India’s legal profession.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking one-third reservation for women advocates in State Bar Councils across the country. The plea highlights the gross under-representation of women in bar leadership positions despite their growing participation in the legal profession.
The petition, filed by Advocate Shehla Chaudhary, was drafted by Advocates Md. Anas Chaudhary and Alia Zaid, and filed through Advocate-on-Record Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary. The matter was argued by Dr. Charu Mathur before a Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi.
Supreme Court’s Observation
During the hearing, the Bench observed that the petitioner “may have approached the Court late,” but found merit in the plea and issued notice returnable in one week.
Dr. Mathur urged the Court to intervene even though several State Bar Councils had already closed their nomination processes, arguing that the Apex Court could reopen the nomination window briefly to ensure compliance with women’s representation.
“The Court can direct reopening of nominations for even three days to ensure compliance with women’s representation,”
Dr. Mathur submitted.
Accepting the urgency, the Court directed that notice be served to all State Bar Councils via email, with responses expected within a week.
The PIL
The PIL seeks judicial directions to implement a one-third reservation for women in all State Bar Councils, aligning with constitutional guarantees of equality and equal opportunity under Articles 14, 15, 16, and 21.
According to the petition, while the number of women lawyers has risen significantly, their representation in bar governance remains disproportionately low, a factor that, the petitioner argues, undermines the inclusiveness of the legal system.
Citing a Bar & Bench (July 2021) report, the petition notes that only 9 out of 441 elected representatives in State Bar Councils are women—a mere 2.04%.
“Issues concerning women advocates are rarely addressed due to negligible representation in bar councils and associations,”
the plea states.
The petition also references findings from the Supreme Court’s Centre for Research and Planning, which revealed that one in five district courts in India lack separate toilets for women. It argues that such infrastructural neglect stems from the absence of women in decision-making roles within bar institutions.
Tracing the history of women in India’s legal profession, the petition recalls pioneers such as Cornelia Sorabji—the first woman to pass the Civil Law examination at Oxford in 1892, and Regina Guha, who was denied enrollment by the Calcutta High Court in 1916. Women gained the right to practice law only after the Legal Practitioners (Women) Act, 1923. Yet, a century later, bar leadership continues to be male-dominated.
Legal Basis and Constitutional Parallels
The petition relies on Section 6(1)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, which mandates bar councils to safeguard the rights and privileges of advocates. It argues that gender diversity within these councils is essential to address women-specific professional challenges.
Drawing parallels with constitutional reforms, the plea cites:
- The 106th Constitutional Amendment (Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam) – reserving one-third of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.
- Articles 243D and 243T – providing for reservation in Panchayati Raj Institutions and Municipalities.
- Article 243ZJ(1) – ensuring women’s representation in cooperative societies.
The petition also references the Supreme Court’s own May 2, 2024, order, which reserved one-third of seats for women in the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).
“The expression ‘proportional representation’ in Section 3(2)(b) of the Advocates Act must include underrepresented classes of advocates, especially women,”
the plea asserts.
Case Title:
Ms. Shehla Chaudhary v. Union of India & Ors.
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1060/2025
READ ORDER
