1 Mar 2026·Source: The Hindu

4 min

Social IssuesPolity & GovernanceNEWS

Accessibility in courts remains a challenge for lawyers with disabilities

Q: What are the potential implications if accessibility in courts remains inconsistent for lawyers with disabilities?

Inconsistent accessibility can lead to: Key points: Reduced representation of lawyers with disabilities in the legal profession, limiting diversity and inclusion.. Denial of equal opportunity for lawyers with disabilities to effectively represent their clients, potentially affecting the quality of justice.. Erosion of public trust in the judiciary's commitment to equality and non-discrimination.. Violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, particularly Article 14 (equality before the law) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty). Exam tip: When discussing implications, always link back to constitutional principles and potential impacts on vulnerable groups. This adds weight to your analysis in Mains.

Q: What specific facts from this news are most important for Prelims, and what MCQ trap might UPSC set?

For Prelims, remember: Key points: The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act was enacted in 2016.. The Act is linked to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).. Advocates Sanchita Ain and Sarah Sunny have recently highlighted accessibility issues.. UPSC might create a trap by asking about the year of the UNCRPD or misattributing the advocacy to a different organization. Exam tip: Pay close attention to dates and the exact names of Acts and Conventions. UPSC often tests factual recall in Prelims.

Lawyers highlight inconsistent accessibility in courtrooms for hearing-impaired lawyers.

Advocate Sanchita Ain and advocate Sarah Sunny have highlighted the persistent challenges faced by lawyers with disabilities in accessing courtrooms. Despite some progress, consistent accessibility remains elusive. In 2023, Sanchita Ain arranged a sign language interpreter for a hearing-impaired lawyer during Supreme Court proceedings.

However, she noted that progress has since stalled. Sarah Sunny recounted being asked to leave a Bengaluru courtroom despite having arranged her own interpreter. Both lawyers emphasized the critical need for inclusive practices to become routine, ensuring equal access to justice for all lawyers.

Key Facts

Accessibility in courtrooms remains inconsistent and difficult to secure for lawyers with disabilities.

Advocate Sanchita Ain arranged a sign language interpreter for a hearing-impaired lawyer during Supreme Court proceedings in 2023.

Progress in providing accessibility has stalled since 2023.

In 2024, advocate Sarah Sunny was asked to leave a courtroom in Bengaluru despite arranging her own interpreter.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Social Justice - Issues relating to vulnerable sections of the population

Constitutional provisions related to equality and right to life

Role of legislation in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities

In Simple Words

Imagine a workplace where some people can't fully participate because of physical barriers or lack of support. It's like that for lawyers with disabilities in courtrooms. Even though there's been some progress, it's still hard for them to access courtrooms and fully do their jobs.

India Angle

In India, this means that lawyers who are deaf or have other disabilities may struggle to get the accommodations they need to work effectively. This affects their ability to earn a living and contribute to the legal system.

For Instance

Think about a shop that doesn't have a ramp. A person in a wheelchair can't enter and buy anything. Similarly, a courtroom without sign language interpreters excludes deaf lawyers.

It matters because everyone deserves a fair chance to participate in society, including in the legal profession. Making courtrooms accessible ensures equal justice for all.

Accessibility is not just a convenience; it's a right that ensures equal participation in the justice system.

Advocate Sanchita Ain and advocate Sarah Sunny highlighted the challenges faced by lawyers with disabilities in accessing courtrooms. Despite some progress, accessibility remains inconsistent and difficult to secure. Sanchita Ain recounted her experience of arranging a sign language interpreter for a hearing-impaired lawyer during Supreme Court proceedings in 2023, but noted that progress has stalled since then.

Sarah Sunny shared her experience of being asked to leave a courtroom in Bengaluru despite arranging her own interpreter. Both lawyers emphasized the need for inclusive practices to become routine to ensure equal access to justice for all lawyers.

Expert Analysis

The challenges faced by lawyers with disabilities in accessing courtrooms highlight the need for a deeper understanding of several key concepts related to disability rights and inclusive practices.

The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 is a crucial piece of legislation that aims to ensure full and effective participation and inclusion of persons with disabilities in society. The Act replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, and brought India in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). The Act mandates accessibility in various spheres, including access to justice. The experiences of advocates Sanchita Ain and Sarah Sunny demonstrate that despite the existence of this Act, its implementation in ensuring accessibility in courtrooms remains inconsistent.

The principle of reasonable accommodation is central to disability rights. Reasonable accommodation refers to necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments that do not impose a disproportionate or undue burden, where needed in a particular case, to ensure to persons with disabilities the enjoyment or exercise on an equal basis with others of all human rights and fundamental freedoms. The denial of reasonable accommodation constitutes discrimination under the RPwD Act, 2016. Sarah Sunny's experience of being asked to leave a courtroom despite arranging her own interpreter indicates a failure to provide reasonable accommodation.

The concept of universal design is also relevant. Universal design refers to the design and composition of an environment so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability. While arranging a sign language interpreter is a necessary accommodation, a courtroom designed with universal design principles would ideally incorporate features that make it inherently accessible to individuals with various disabilities, reducing the need for ad-hoc arrangements.

For UPSC aspirants, understanding these concepts is crucial for both prelims and mains. Questions may be framed on the provisions of the RPwD Act, the definition and scope of reasonable accommodation, and the principles of universal design. Mains questions could explore the challenges in implementing disability rights legislation and the measures needed to ensure inclusive access to justice.

Visual Insights

Accessibility Challenges in Courts

Highlights the ongoing challenges faced by lawyers with disabilities in accessing courtrooms, despite some progress.

Supreme Court Hearing (2023): Sign Language Interpreter Arranged: 2023
Bengaluru Courtroom Incident: Lawyer Asked to Leave Despite Interpreter: 2026

More Information

Background

The issue of accessibility for lawyers with disabilities in Indian courts is rooted in the broader context of disability rights and the implementation of relevant legislation. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, was enacted to fulfill India's obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). This Act mandates equal opportunity, protection of rights, and full participation for persons with disabilities, including access to justice. Despite the legal framework, the actual experience of lawyers with disabilities reveals a gap between policy and practice. The challenges highlighted by advocates Sanchita Ain and Sarah Sunny reflect systemic issues in ensuring accessibility in courtrooms. These issues include a lack of awareness, inadequate infrastructure, and a failure to consistently implement the principle of reasonable accommodation. The absence of routine inclusive practices perpetuates barriers for lawyers with disabilities, hindering their ability to effectively practice law. The Constitution of India guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws under Article 14. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which has been interpreted to include the right to a dignified life. Ensuring accessibility for lawyers with disabilities is essential to uphold these constitutional principles and ensure that they can fully exercise their right to practice their profession on an equal basis with others.

Latest Developments

In recent years, there has been increasing attention to the issue of accessibility for persons with disabilities in various sectors, including the judiciary. Several court judgments have emphasized the need for reasonable accommodation and the implementation of the RPwD Act, 2016. However, the actual progress on the ground remains slow and uneven. The Supreme Court of India has taken steps to improve accessibility, such as providing ramps and accessible restrooms in some courtrooms. However, these measures are not consistently implemented across all courts in the country. Furthermore, the availability of sign language interpreters and other necessary accommodations remains limited. Looking ahead, there is a need for greater awareness and sensitization among judges, lawyers, and court staff regarding the needs of lawyers with disabilities. The implementation of universal design principles in the construction and renovation of court buildings is also essential. Regular audits of accessibility and the establishment of grievance redressal mechanisms can help ensure that the rights of lawyers with disabilities are protected.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why is the accessibility of courts for lawyers with disabilities a recurring issue, even with existing laws like the RPwD Act of 2016?

Despite the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, accessibility remains a challenge due to:

•Lack of consistent implementation of the RPwD Act at all levels of the judiciary.
•Attitudinal barriers and lack of awareness among court staff and other stakeholders.
•Inadequate infrastructure and resources allocated for accessibility measures.
•The need for reasonable accommodation is often addressed on an ad-hoc basis rather than being integrated into standard practices.

Exam Tip

Remember that the RPwD Act, 2016, stems from India's obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). UPSC may test you on the linkages between international conventions and domestic laws.

2. In the context of the news, what specific provision of the RPwD Act, 2016 is most relevant, and how could UPSC frame a question around it?

The most relevant provision is the Act's emphasis on 'reasonable accommodation' to ensure equal access and participation for persons with disabilities. UPSC could frame a question like:

•"Critically examine the implementation of the principle of 'reasonable accommodation' under the RPwD Act, 2016, with specific reference to the challenges faced by lawyers with disabilities in accessing Indian courts."
•The question could test your understanding of the concept of 'reasonable accommodation,' its scope, and the practical difficulties in its enforcement within the judicial system.

Exam Tip

Focus on understanding the nuances of 'reasonable accommodation' – it's not just about physical infrastructure but also about procedural and attitudinal changes. Note the difference between 'reasonable accommodation' and 'universal design.'

3. What are the potential implications if accessibility in courts remains inconsistent for lawyers with disabilities?

Inconsistent accessibility can lead to:

•Reduced representation of lawyers with disabilities in the legal profession, limiting diversity and inclusion.
•Denial of equal opportunity for lawyers with disabilities to effectively represent their clients, potentially affecting the quality of justice.
•Erosion of public trust in the judiciary's commitment to equality and non-discrimination.
•Violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, particularly Article 14 (equality before the law) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty).

Exam Tip

When discussing implications, always link back to constitutional principles and potential impacts on vulnerable groups. This adds weight to your analysis in Mains.

4. How does the principle of 'universal design' relate to the issue of accessibility in courts, and why isn't it more widely adopted?

Universal design aims to create environments and products that are usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. While beneficial, its adoption is slow due to:

•Higher upfront costs compared to retrofitting existing infrastructure.
•Lack of awareness and understanding of the principles of universal design among architects, planners, and policymakers.
•Resistance to change and a preference for traditional designs.
•Absence of strong regulatory mandates and incentives to promote universal design in public spaces.

Exam Tip

Differentiate between 'reasonable accommodation' (adjustments for specific individuals) and 'universal design' (designing for everyone from the start). UPSC may test you on this distinction.

5. What specific facts from this news are most important for Prelims, and what MCQ trap might UPSC set?

For Prelims, remember:

•The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act was enacted in 2016.
•The Act is linked to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).
•Advocates Sanchita Ain and Sarah Sunny have recently highlighted accessibility issues.
•UPSC might create a trap by asking about the year of the UNCRPD or misattributing the advocacy to a different organization.

Exam Tip

Pay close attention to dates and the exact names of Acts and Conventions. UPSC often tests factual recall in Prelims.

6. How does this issue of accessibility in courts connect to broader social justice concerns in India?

The lack of accessibility in courts reflects a larger pattern of exclusion and discrimination faced by persons with disabilities in various spheres of life, including:

•Education: Limited access to inclusive education hinders opportunities for persons with disabilities.
•Employment: Discrimination in hiring practices and lack of workplace accommodations restrict employment opportunities.
•Healthcare: Inadequate access to healthcare services and rehabilitation facilities.
•Public spaces: Inaccessibility of public transportation, buildings, and other infrastructure limits participation in social and civic life.

Exam Tip

When discussing social justice issues, try to connect them to multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016: 1. It replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. 2. It aligns Indian law with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). 3. It does NOT mandate accessibility in areas such as access to justice. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: A

Statement 1 is CORRECT: The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 replaced the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995. Statement 2 is CORRECT: The 2016 Act aligns Indian law with the UNCRPD. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The Act mandates accessibility in various spheres, including access to justice. Therefore, only statements 1 and 2 are correct.

2. In the context of disability rights, what does the term 'reasonable accommodation' refer to?

A.Providing financial assistance to persons with disabilities
B.Making modifications to ensure equal participation for persons with disabilities
C.Reserving jobs exclusively for persons with disabilities
D.Providing free healthcare to persons with disabilities

Show Answer

Answer: B

Reasonable accommodation refers to necessary and appropriate modifications and adjustments that do not impose a disproportionate or undue burden, where needed in a particular case, to ensure to persons with disabilities the enjoyment or exercise on an equal basis with others of all human rights and fundamental freedoms. The denial of reasonable accommodation constitutes discrimination under the RPwD Act, 2016.

3. Which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India is/are most relevant to the issue of accessibility for lawyers with disabilities in courts? 1. Article 14: Equality before law 2. Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty 3. Article 19: Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: A

Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which has been interpreted to include the right to a dignified life. While Article 19 is important for freedom of speech, it is less directly relevant to the issue of accessibility for lawyers with disabilities in courts. Therefore, only Articles 14 and 21 are most relevant.