New Delhi: On December 3, 2024, the Supreme Court of India expressed profound discontent regarding the termination of six female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh. The court scrutinized the criteria employed for their dismissal, highlighting a significant gender bias in the judicial evaluation process. During the proceedings, Justice B.V. Nagarathna made a striking remark, stating, I wish men had menstruation then only they would understand, emphasizing that male judges would better comprehend the challenges faced by their female counterparts if they experienced similar physical and mental health issues associated with menstruation and childbirth.Context of the Case: Judicial Dismissals Under FireThe Supreme Courts comments arose during a hearing concerning the termination of six women judges, two of whom have yet to be reinstated. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had dismissed these judges based on claims of inadequate performance during their probationary period. The state counsel argued that poor case disposal rates justified their termination. However, the Supreme Court countered this argument by insisting that the same standards should apply to male judges as well. Justice Nagarathna emphasized that if women are suffering physically and mentally, it is unjust to label them as slow and send them home.Judicial Performance Under Scrutiny: A Miscarriage of JusticeThe courts observations were particularly pointed regarding one judge, Aditi Sharma, who had faced significant personal challenges, including a miscarriage and her brothers cancer diagnosis. Despite her previous commendable performance ratings, her recent struggles were overlooked in the assessment of her work. Justice Nagarathna remarked that it is easy to dismiss judges without considering their circumstances, stating, It is very easy to say dismissed-dismissed and go home.This reflects a broader concern about how mental health and personal hardships are inadequately factored into judicial evaluations.Future Proceedings: A Call for Equality in Judicial StandardsThe Supreme Court has scheduled further hearings on this matter for December 12, 2024. The benchs insistence on equitable treatment for all judges regardless of gender underscores a critical need for reform in how judicial performance is assessed, particularly concerning the unique challenges faced by women in the judiciary. The courts intervention aims not only to address the immediate issue of these terminations but also to instigate a broader dialogue on gender equality within Indias judicial system.In summary, the Supreme Courts strong stance against the Madhya Pradesh High Courts actions signals a pivotal moment in advocating for womens rights within the legal profession, challenging systemic biases that have long persisted in judicial evaluations.
