The Supreme Court issued a stern warning regarding gender representation in the judiciary during a hearing on a plea for 33% reservation for women in the Delhi High Court Bar Association. Displeased with the bar’s conduct, the court emphasized the need for compliance with its previous directives on gender equity. Final arguments are set for November 29, with a ruling anticipated shortly after.
New Delhi: In a strong response to discussions around gender representation in the judiciary, the Supreme Court, on Monday, issued a stern warning: “Enough is enough. Don’t mess with the court.” This statement came during a hearing concerning pleas for 33% reservation for women lawyers in the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA).
The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, was visibly displeased when informed that advocates in the Delhi High Court had questioned the Supreme Court’s representation of women judges. Addressing the claim, Justice Surya Kant remarked,
“You are adding fuel to the fire. Let the media hear it. Don’t mess with the court. Enough is enough. Pathetic. This is not the way the bar conducts itself.”
The court decided to move directly to the larger issue, fixing November 29 for final arguments. The judgment is expected within three days following the hearing.
The case centers on ensuring 33% reservation for women in the DHCBA executive body. Previously, the Supreme Court directed the bar association to reserve the treasurer post for women and encouraged adding another reserved post for female office-bearers. It also stipulated that at least three women must be part of the 10-member executive committee, with one being a senior designated advocate.
Despite these directives, the general body meeting of the DHCBA failed to pass the proposal for reservations. Senior advocate and DHCBA president Mohit Mathur presented eight video clips from the meeting, out of which only three were deemed relevant by the bench.
Petitioners argued that the bar association’s offer of reserving the joint treasurer position, described as merely “ceremonial,” defied the court’s earlier mandate. The Supreme Court was adamant about scrutinizing the nature of the discussions held during the meeting to ensure proper deliberation.
This case forms part of the judiciary’s broader push for gender equity within legal institutions. The court had previously directed similar changes for the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), reserving 33% of posts in its executive committee for women.
Read Also: “No Illegality in ECI’s Ban on Mobile Phones at Polling Booths”: Bombay HC
Justice Kant underscored the judiciary’s commitment to this cause, even instructing bar bodies in district courts to adopt similar measures. However, Monday’s proceedings highlighted resistance from sections of the legal community.
The Supreme Court’s warning signals its intent to enforce accountability and uphold gender representation.
“We won’t hear anything. Now, we will go into the larger issue of the matter and decide the issue finally,”
the bench declared.
With the final hearing scheduled for November 29, this landmark case could redefine gender dynamics in the legal profession, ensuring fair representation and setting a precedent for other institutions.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES