SC seeks Centre’s response on proportional representation for women in bar councils

The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to consider a petition seeking proportional representation for women and other disadvantaged groups in the Bar Council of India (BCI) and 21 state bar councils which hardly have any woman as its member.
Issuing notice on a petition filed by a lawyer, MG Yogamaya, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud noted a chart produced by the petitioner which showed that the 20-member BCI did not have a single woman as its member. So was the situation across bar councils in the bigger states of Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, and Rajasthan. The Delhi bar council, too, figured in this list while the bar councils having a nominal representation of women were Madhya Pradesh (2 out of 27), Bihar (2 out of 26), Telangana (1 out of 27) and Tamil Nadu & Puducherry (1 out of 16).
The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said, “We will issue notice.” The petition was argued by senior advocate PV Dinesh who said that the words “proportional representation” finds mention in the Advocates Act, 1961 but is hardly implemented. Besides women, the petition demanded representation of queer community, specially abled persons, persons from scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, and other marginalised strata of society.
It was in 1923 women were allowed to practise as advocates in the country with the passing of the Legal Practitioners’ (Women) Act, 1923. The petition said, “The Bar Council plays a pivotal role in regulating the legal profession, yet its composition often lacks adequate representation of women. This discrepancy is antithetical to the principles of equality and non-discrimination envisaged by the Indian Constitution.”
As the bench agreed to consider responses of Centre, BCI and the 21 state bar councils on a later date yet to be specified, Dinesh said, “There should be some persuasive value now that a notice has been issued.”
The petitioner pointed out that while the judiciary has been advocating for construction of toilets for women, effective mechanism for addressing sexual harassment cases and establishment of creche in court premises, lack of representation of women and marginalised groups in bar councils has impacted the decision-making process for implementing such measures. Even with the Advocates Act been introduced in 1961, six decades have gone by without any legislative intervention to address the issue of proportional representation of women, the petition said.
Section 3(2) of the Advocates Act, 1961 deals with ‘proportional representation’. This provision provides for a 15 member-bar council for a bar with not less than 5,000 members, 20-member council for less than 10,000 members, and a 25-member council for a bar with over 10,000 lawyers. It goes on to add that the members are to be “elected in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote from amongst advocates on the electoral roll of the state bar council. One member elected by each state bar council from amongst its members constitutes the BCI.
Dinesh argued that this term “proportional representation” should be given a wider meaning particularly in the light of developing law when 33% reservation is being provided to women in Lok Sabha and state legislatures, Panchayati Raj system under the 73rd Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1992 and one woman director on board of listed companies under the recent amendments to the Companies Act, 2013.
Lately, the top court had in May this year ordered that one-third of seats be reserved for women in the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) – the body of lawyers practising before the top court.
The petitioner listed out some of the grounds that are not conducive to women lawyers. “The legal profession and Bar Councils have traditionally been male-dominated environments. In view of the existent patriarchal system, the lady lawyers are unable to dedicate time for such campaigning as they are also compelled to be homemakers, apart from the profession,” the petition said.
Pitching for representation to women, Yogamaya added, “It is highly necessary that this court may pass appropriate directions to regulate the Bar Council election process so that many meritorious professional lawyers, who are not full-time politicians, can spare their time for the benefit of the administration of justice.”