1 Mar 2026·Source: The Hindu

5 min

Social IssuesPolity & GovernanceNEWS

Social Prejudice Persists Even Among Members of Judiciary

Former Chief Justice highlights the persistence of social prejudice within the judiciary.

Rajya Sabha MP P. Wilson introduced the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeking to mandate social diversity in the higher judiciary and establish regional benches of the Supreme Court. Between 2018 and 2024, approximately 78% of judges appointed to High Courts belonged to upper castes, while Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes accounted for only about 5% each. As of August 2024, women constitute only 14% of High Court judges, and there is only one sitting woman judge in the Supreme Court (Justice B.V. Nagarathna). Religious minorities account for less than 5% of the judges appointed to the higher judiciary in the last six years. As of January 2026, the Supreme Court has over 90,000 pending cases, with High Courts struggling with a nearly 33% vacancy rate. The bill seeks to amend Article 130 of the Constitution, which allows the Chief Justice of India, with Presidential approval, to appoint other places as seats for the Supreme Court, providing the legal basis for regional benches.

The bill also aims to address the lack of transparency in appointments, the influence of informal professional networks, and the absence of constitutional quotas in the higher judiciary. It proposes measures such as reviving the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), establishing permanent Supreme Court benches in Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata, and institutionalizing diversity metrics in the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointments. The bill also suggests mandating the government to clear Collegium names within 90 days and creating mentorship programs for marginalized lawyers.

This push for judicial diversity aligns with constitutional goals of equality and social justice, addressing the underrepresentation of backward communities in decision-making spaces. This is relevant for UPSC exams, particularly in GS Paper II (Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice) and Essay papers, focusing on social justice and constitutional values.

Key Facts

S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, highlighted the persistence of social prejudice within the judiciary.

Judges sometimes advise young women to return home when they choose partners outside their caste or religion.

In one case, a girl was killed in a village in Bihar after following such advice.

The dissonance between public commitment to constitutional values and private conduct was noted.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper II: Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice - Judicial reforms, appointment processes, social justice

Essay Paper: Social justice, constitutional values, judicial reforms

Potential question types: Analytical questions on the need for judicial diversity, challenges in implementation, and the balance between judicial independence and accountability

In Simple Words

Sometimes, even people in powerful positions like judges have their own biases. This means they might not always treat everyone fairly, even if they're supposed to. It's like a teacher who has favorite students and gives them better grades.

India Angle

In India, caste and religion are still big issues. Even educated people, including judges, can be influenced by these prejudices. This can affect how they handle cases, especially those involving inter-caste or inter-religious marriages.

For Instance

Think about a village council that favors people from the dominant caste. Even if there are rules to protect everyone, the council might still make decisions that benefit their own community.

If judges are biased, it means some people won't get a fair trial. This can lead to injustice and erode trust in the legal system.

Fairness should be blind, like justice wearing a blindfold.

S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court, pointed out the persistence of social prejudice even within the judiciary. He noted a dissonance between public commitment to constitutional values and private conduct, citing instances where judges advised young women to return home when they chose partners outside their caste or religion.

He recounted a case where a girl was later killed in a village in Bihar after such advice. This highlights the need for greater awareness and sensitivity to social issues within the judiciary.

Expert Analysis

The push for diversity in the Indian judiciary brings several key concepts into focus. The first is the Collegium System, which is the method of appointing and transferring judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. Originating through judicial pronouncements (primarily the 'Three Judges Cases' between 1982-1998), it effectively gives the judiciary the power to appoint judges, with minimal executive interference. The current debate highlights concerns that the Collegium's lack of transparency may unintentionally perpetuate elite networks, limiting opportunities for marginalized candidates, as evidenced by delays or rejections of women candidates since 2020 without clear reasons.

Another key concept is Article 130 of the Constitution of India. This article states that the Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, appoint. P. Wilson's Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeks to invoke this article to establish regional benches of the Supreme Court in Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata. This aims to decentralize justice and reduce travel costs for litigants, addressing the current Delhi-centric nature of the Supreme Court, which handles over 90,000 pending cases as of January 2026.

The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) is also central to this discussion. The MoP is a document that guides the appointment of judges to the higher judiciary. Institutionalizing diversity metrics within the MoP, as proposed by the P. Wilson Bill, would mean including demographic diversity as a formal criterion for appointments. This could help correct the historical underrepresentation of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, women, and minorities, who currently constitute a small percentage of judges in the High Courts and Supreme Court.

Finally, the concept of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) is relevant. The NJAC was an attempt to create a more transparent and representative body for judicial appointments, including members from the executive and civil society. However, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC Act in 2015, reaffirming the primacy of the Collegium system. Reviving the NJAC, as suggested in the P. Wilson Bill, could potentially balance judicial independence with greater accountability and diversity in appointments.

For UPSC aspirants, understanding these concepts is crucial for both Prelims and Mains. Prelims questions can focus on the constitutional articles, historical evolution of the Collegium, and the NJAC Act. Mains questions can address the need for judicial reforms, the challenges of ensuring diversity without compromising merit, and the balance between judicial independence and accountability.

Visual Insights

Key Statistics on Judicial Diversity and Pendency

Highlights key statistics related to the judiciary, including the percentage of women judges, pending cases, and High Court vacancy rates. These figures underscore the challenges and the need for reforms.

Women in High Courts: 14%
Supreme Court Pending Cases: 90,000+
High Court Vacancy Rate: 33%

More Information

Background

The Indian judiciary, comprising the Supreme Court and High Courts, plays a crucial role in upholding the Constitution and ensuring justice. The appointment of judges to these higher courts has historically been governed by the Collegium System, a process evolved through judicial pronouncements. This system has been the subject of debate due to concerns about transparency and representation. The need for judicial diversity stems from the recognition that a judiciary that reflects the social fabric of India can enhance public trust and ensure more inclusive interpretations of the law. The underrepresentation of marginalized communities, women, and minorities in the higher judiciary has raised questions about equal opportunity and social justice. The Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026 introduced by P. Wilson seeks to address these concerns by mandating social diversity in judicial appointments. Several articles of the Constitution are relevant to this issue. Article 124 governs the appointment of Supreme Court judges, while Article 217 outlines the appointment process for High Court judges. Article 130 allows the Chief Justice of India, with Presidential approval, to appoint other places as seats for the Supreme Court. The P. Wilson Bill aims to amend Article 130 to facilitate the establishment of regional benches, promoting access to justice for litigants from different parts of the country.

Latest Developments

In recent years, there has been increasing scrutiny of the composition of the Indian judiciary and calls for greater diversity. Several reports and studies have highlighted the underrepresentation of marginalized groups, women, and minorities in the higher courts. This has led to discussions about reforming the Collegium System and exploring alternative mechanisms for judicial appointments. The government has expressed its commitment to ensuring social justice and inclusivity in all spheres, including the judiciary. However, there have been disagreements between the government and the judiciary regarding the appointment process, particularly concerning the role of the executive. The debate over the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) reflects these tensions. Looking ahead, the focus is likely to remain on finding a balance between judicial independence and accountability, while also promoting diversity and representation in the higher judiciary. The fate of the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026 introduced by P. Wilson will depend on political consensus and judicial interpretation. The establishment of regional benches of the Supreme Court could also be a significant step towards decentralizing justice and improving access for litigants across the country.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Why is the underrepresentation of certain groups in the judiciary being highlighted now, in 2026?

The issue is gaining traction now due to increasing scrutiny of the judiciary's composition and persistent calls for greater diversity. The introduction of the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeking to mandate social diversity, has further amplified the discussion.

2. What's the key difference between the existing Collegium System and the proposed changes in the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026?

The Collegium System, evolved through judicial pronouncements, has been criticized for a lack of transparency and representation. The Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, aims to mandate social diversity in the higher judiciary, addressing the underrepresentation of marginalized groups, women, and minorities, which the Collegium System has so far failed to fully resolve.

3. If a Mains question asks me to 'critically examine' the need for diversity in the judiciary, what points should I include?

A balanced answer should acknowledge both the potential benefits and challenges. * Benefits: Improved public trust, fairer application of laws, broader range of perspectives. * Challenges: Potential impact on meritocracy, difficulties in implementation, risk of tokenism. * Also, discuss the current composition of the judiciary and relevant statistics.

•Benefits: Improved public trust, fairer application of laws, broader range of perspectives.
•Challenges: Potential impact on meritocracy, difficulties in implementation, risk of tokenism.
•Also, discuss the current composition of the judiciary and relevant statistics.

Exam Tip

Structure your answer with an introduction defining diversity, a body discussing pros and cons with examples, and a conclusion offering a balanced way forward.

4. How does the observation about judges advising young women on marriage choices relate to GS Paper 4 (Ethics)?

This highlights the ethical dilemma of dissonance between public commitment to constitutional values (like individual freedom and choice) and private conduct reflecting social prejudices. It raises questions about judicial impartiality and the influence of personal biases on professional decisions.

5. What specific data point from this news is most likely to be twisted in a Prelims MCQ, and how can I avoid that trap?

The percentages related to caste representation in High Court appointments (78% upper castes, 5% SC, 5% ST) are prime candidates for manipulation. For example, a question might incorrectly state that Scheduled Tribes constitute 15% of High Court judges. examTip: Always double-check the exact figures and focus on the relative proportions rather than absolute numbers.

Exam Tip

Always double-check the exact figures and focus on the relative proportions rather than absolute numbers.

6. What are the potential implications of mandating social diversity in the judiciary through constitutional amendment?

The implications are multifaceted: * Increased representation of marginalized groups, potentially leading to a more inclusive and equitable justice system. * Concerns about compromising meritocracy if diversity becomes the sole or primary criterion for selection. * Potential for increased politicization of judicial appointments. * Impact on public trust and confidence in the judiciary, depending on how the amendment is implemented and perceived.

•Increased representation of marginalized groups, potentially leading to a more inclusive and equitable justice system.
•Concerns about compromising meritocracy if diversity becomes the sole or primary criterion for selection.
•Potential for increased politicization of judicial appointments.
•Impact on public trust and confidence in the judiciary, depending on how the amendment is implemented and perceived.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Collegium System in India: 1. It originated through judicial pronouncements, primarily the 'Three Judges Cases' between 1982-1998. 2. It gives the executive the final authority in appointing judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. 3. The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) guides the appointment of judges within the Collegium System. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

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

Show Answer

Answer: B

Statement 1 is CORRECT: The Collegium System did originate through judicial pronouncements, mainly the 'Three Judges Cases' between 1982 and 1998. Statement 2 is INCORRECT: The Collegium System gives the judiciary, not the executive, the primary role in appointing judges. Statement 3 is CORRECT: The Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) does guide the appointment of judges within the Collegium System. It outlines the process and criteria for selection.

2. Which of the following statements is NOT correct regarding Article 130 of the Constitution of India? A) It states that the Supreme Court shall sit only in Delhi. B) It allows the Chief Justice of India, with Presidential approval, to appoint other places as seats for the Supreme Court. C) P. Wilson's Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeks to invoke this article to establish regional benches of the Supreme Court. D) It provides the legal basis for establishing regional benches of the Supreme Court.

A.It states that the Supreme Court shall sit only in Delhi.
B.It allows the Chief Justice of India, with Presidential approval, to appoint other places as seats for the Supreme Court.
C.P. Wilson's Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeks to invoke this article to establish regional benches of the Supreme Court.
D.It provides the legal basis for establishing regional benches of the Supreme Court.

Show Answer

Answer: A

Option A is NOT correct: Article 130 does NOT state that the Supreme Court shall sit only in Delhi. It allows the Chief Justice of India, with Presidential approval, to appoint other places as seats for the Supreme Court. Options B, C, and D are correct statements regarding Article 130 and its relevance to the establishment of regional benches.

3. Which of the following measures are proposed in the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2026, introduced by P. Wilson, to promote social diversity in the higher judiciary? 1. Reviving the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). 2. Establishing permanent Supreme Court benches in Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata. 3. Institutionalizing diversity metrics in the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointments. Select the correct answer using the code given below:

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

Show Answer

Answer: D

All the statements are correct. Statement 1 is correct: The bill proposes reviving the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). Statement 2 is correct: The bill proposes establishing permanent Supreme Court benches in Chennai, Mumbai, and Kolkata. Statement 3 is correct: The bill proposes institutionalizing diversity metrics in the Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointments.