Need for diversity in the judiciary

 Need for diversity in the judiciary

A diverse judiciary is essential for legitimacy, fairness, and effective justice in pluralistic societies like India. It builds public trust by reflecting societal demographics, brings varied life experiences to reduce biases, enriches decision-making, and ensures courts better address issues affecting marginalized groups.

Key arguments include:

Legitimacy & trust — Underrepresented groups perceive the system as fairer and more inclusive.

Better rulings — Diverse perspectives challenge assumptions and lead to nuanced outcomes, especially in social justice cases.

Reduced bias — Broader backgrounds counter dominant viewpoints.

In India, the higher judiciary (Supreme Court and High Courts) remains disproportionately upper-caste, male, and majority-community dominated, despite no formal reservations for these posts (unlike in subordinate courts).

Recent data (as of early 2026):

From 2021 to January 2026, of 593 High Court appointments, only ~4% SC (26), ~2% ST (14), ~14% OBC (80), with nearly 80% from upper castes.

Women: ~14–17% in recent High Court appointments; currently ~110–130 women in High Courts (out of ~800+ sanctioned strength), and just 1–2 in the Supreme Court (out of 33–34 judges).

Religious minorities: <5–6% in higher judiciary.

Since 2018–2024/2026 periods show similar patterns: ~20% SC/ST/OBC combined in some datasets, women <15%, minorities <5%.

Supreme Court: Dominated by upper-caste Hindu men; limited SC (1–3), OBC (few), no ST, and minimal women representation.

This imbalance persists amid huge pendency (>90,000 in Supreme Court, crores overall) and low judge-population ratio.

Recent developments include:

A Private Member's Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026 (introduced by DMK MP P. Wilson) proposing proportional representation for SC, ST, OBC, women, and religious minorities in Supreme Court/High Court appointments, plus regional Supreme Court benches (e.g., in Kolkata, Mumbai, Chennai) to improve access and address backlog/diversity.

Government efforts encourage collegiums to consider diversity, but no mandatory quotas; appointments remain collegium-driven.

Counterarguments note that merit and impartiality should remain primary, but evidence shows diversity strengthens (not weakens) these by broadening viewpoints without quotas overriding qualifications.

Overall, greater diversity—via transparent processes, wider talent outreach, and potential reforms—is vital for an equitable, credible judiciary that upholds constitutional values like equality in India's diverse society. 

Tag:judiciary, diversity, representation, justice, courts, inclusion, legal system

Exploring the importance of diversity in the judiciary to ensure fairness, representation, and public trust in the legal system.