AT A PACKED AUDITORIUM in the Supreme Court’s C-Block, the Supreme Court Bar Association (‘SCBA’) convened a gathering on Wednesday for its panel discussion titled “We – Women Empowerment in Law: Strength, Struggle and Success.” The event marked a significant moment in the legal community’s ongoing reckoning with gender inequality in the profession. The panel included Chief Justice of India (‘CJI’) Surya Kant, Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Prathiba M. Singh, Attorney General R. Venkataramani, and Professor Rashmi Salpekar.
The occasion also saw the unveiling of the SCBA’s first-of-its-kind pilot survey, “Documenting Voices of Women Advocates in Delhi-NCR,” conducted among 301 women lawyers practising across courts and tribunals in the region. Senior Advocate Dr. Anindita Pujari presented the preliminary findings of the survey.
Majority women in litigation are first generation
A striking insight from the survey is that 84.1 percent of respondents identified as first-generation lawyers which indicated that most women enter the profession without the benefit of established legal networks. Their experiences in litigation reflected this structural disadvantage. 38.5 percent described their professional journey as “sometimes encouraging, sometimes discouraging,” while 25.2 percent found it encouraging and 17.6 percent said it became “more encouraging with each passing day.”
Only 11.3 percent characterised it as “very encouraging,” indicating that despite rising representation, the profession remains uneven terrain. When aggregated, 68 percent reported encountering discouragement at some point, a statistic Dr. Pujari called “a stark reminder of the structural and cultural hurdles that persist.”
A striking insight from the survey is that 84.1 percent of respondents identified as first-generation lawyers.
More than half say leadership opportunities unequal, a third report ‘definitely’ experiencing bias
Questions relating to leadership revealed continued gender disparity. Of the women who responded, 57.8 percent said opportunities for leadership roles in bar bodies were not equal for men and women, although 42.2 percent believed such opportunities did exist. Despite this gap, the ambition to lead remained strong, with 58.9 percent of respondents expressing willingness to take up positions in bar councils or bar associations, even as 30.4 percent said they would not and another 10.7 percent were still undecided.
Gender bias also emerged as a significant barrier. Among those surveyed, 33.1 percent said they had definitely experienced bias and 29.1 percent said they encountered it occasionally. 9.4 percent reported facing it frequently. Only 23.1 percent said they had not experienced it at all.
The numbers were even more concerning for first-generation lawyers: 39.6 percent in this group reported occasional bias, compared to 35.1 percent among women who came from families already in the profession.
Justice Nagarathna pointed to the persistence of everyday gendered disrespect within courtrooms. Recounting her own experience at the Bar, she noted: “Many a time women advocates are referred to as ‘she’… They won’t say ‘learned counsel’. That shows the attitude of the male counsel and the male lawyers.” She stressed that such conduct cannot form part of the professional legal culture, insisting that “they have to treat the women lawyers as their equals and as their peers.”
Marriage, motherhood reshape careers
Marriage and motherhood were identified as critical inflection points in women’s careers. Of the respondents, 38.2 percent reported facing hardship in continuing work after marriage, while 33.5 percent said they encountered difficulties when deciding to have a child. After childbirth, the challenges intensified, with 56.8 percent reporting hardship and 31.3 percent saying they struggled to secure case deferments due to childcare responsibilities. Support systems around caregiving were uneven as 52.4 percent of women highlighted receiving support when they sought accommodation for family-related responsibilities, while 47.6 percent did not.
“We have a sufficient number of women lawyers who have entered the Bar. The problem is retention… and advancement,” Justice Nagarathna said.
Work-life balance was the most significant challenge cited by 34.2 percent of respondents, reflecting the demanding nature of litigation and the near-absence of structural flexibility for women. Other concerns included lack of job opportunities (highlighted by 16.4 percent), pay disparity (said 14 percent), inadequate mentorship (said 13.7 percent), unrealistic expectations from seniors and clients (said 9.6 percent), and sexual harassment in the workplace (said 6.2 percent). Smaller proportions pointed to mental health concerns, lack of training in courtcraft or drafting, and limited access to research platforms.
Justice Nagarathna highlighted that women’s exclusion does not stem from a lack of talent but a lack of structured opportunity. “We have a sufficient number of women lawyers who have entered the Bar. The problem is retention… and advancement,” she said. She noted that women are too often confined to “domestic violence or family court work,” and pressed seniors to instead “give challenging complex criminal, civil, constitutional and commercial litigation to women juniors so that they can show their talent.”
Stronger institutional policies critical
Across categories, a near-unanimous 95.4 percent of women stressed the need for stronger institutional policies to enable their meaningful participation in the profession. These range from maternity benefits and crèche facilities to workplace safety, flexible working hours, insurance and medical support.
The survey also captured women’s aspirations and career choices. Of those surveyed, 43.1 percent said they would consider transitioning from practice to the judiciary, while 31.2 percent said they would not and 25.8 percent were still exploring the option. When asked whether they would recommend a career in law to their daughters or girls in their close circle, 64.1 percent said yes, while 20.7 percent were uncertain and 15.3 percent said they would not. Corporate work emerged as the most preferred career stream at 39.6 percent, followed closely by litigation at 36.1 percent, with the judicial services (at 13.5 percent) and academia (at 10.8 percent) trailing.
First-generation women lawyers showed a stronger inclination toward the judicial services (said 36.9 percent) and litigation (said 34.9 percent), while second-generation respondents prioritised judicial roles at 39.2 percent, followed by litigation (said 29.4 percent) and academia (said 15.7 percent). While speaking at the panel discussion, Prof. Salpekar noted that opportunities in litigation often arise through informal networks, and urged greater transparency in how such opportunities are allocated.
The SCBA noted that while this survey focuses on Delhi-NCR, an all-India survey is underway to document the experiences of women lawyers across the country, signalling a wider move toward evidence-based reform of gendered professional structures within India’s legal system. The questionnaire for the same would be available on the Supreme Court Bar Association website from December 15th, 2025 to January 15th, 2026.
A moment of promise and a test of institutional commitment
During the event, CJI Kant repeatedly underlined the need to expand women’s presence in the judiciary. He recalled how, as Chair of the Judicial Recruitment Committee between 2010 and 2014, he had overseen a near-doubling of women judicial officers in Punjab and Haryana, from around 20 percent to 46 percent, and emphasised that “when there is institutional will, ways and means will always be found.”
His remarks were met with optimism inside the auditorium, particularly because the Supreme Court today stands at a delicate juncture. Justice Nagarathna is the only woman currently on the bench and the retirement of CJI B.R. Gavai has created an immediate vacancy. Yet this moment of hope also invites scrutiny.
The Leaflet’s analysis had highlighted that the appointment overlooked several senior women judges who could have meaningfully expanded diversity on the bench.
Just months ago, The Leaflet reported extensively on the controversy surrounding Justice Vipul Pancholi’s elevation to the Supreme Court, which was cleared by a 4:1 Collegium majority. Justice Nagarathna had authored a rare and strongly worded dissent, calling the elevation “counterproductive” and cautioning that it could undermine public trust in the Collegium process.
The Leaflet’s analysis had highlighted that the appointment overlooked several senior women judges who could have meaningfully expanded diversity on the bench. The report also noted that the Collegium did not publish its resolution, a break from the transparency norms that had slowly begun taking root under earlier Chief Justices. In this context, CJI Surya Kant’s articulation carries weight. But it also raises a natural question: Will these commitments translate into future Collegium decisions?
With one vacancy open, more expected in the coming months, and the representation of women at the Supreme Court at its lowest point since 2018, the next round of appointments will be an immediate measure of whether the highest institution is prepared to actualise the vision articulated on stage.