Introduction

Women’s status in society is often one of the major determinants of a nation’s overall development. Considering how in most cases they form almost half the nation’s population, A country’s social, economic, and political progress will stagnate if women do not participate actively. This is also ironic considering how women are generally not taken seriously by their superiors, colleagues, or society at large. It is seen that their work is often dismissed or not appreciated enough.

Women, especially in India were kept from working outside apart from their household duties for an exceptionally long time, so the fact that societal view has now evolved and that women now work outside of the home does not completely diminish the fact they still have a long way to go socially and economically.

Gender bias was for the longest time engraved in the Indian society and the way out of it has been and continues to be terribly slow and excruciating for women. This sought of discrimination starts at the recruitment level itself, where most men don’t believe that women can work alongside men in all fields, except for a few narrow ones such as teaching, nursing, and clerical work.

We have come a long way from enforcing these archaic ideas, however, it does not completely diminish the fact that society is yet to reach the destination of social and economic equality for women

This manifests itself, in women who are duly qualified and able, who tend to opt for low-demand jobs because of undervaluation which further leads to many of them feeling insignificant. Women are also the bearers of multitasking, especially in the Indian context, where women are expected to effectively manage their multiple roles, both domestically and professionally. The legal profession is also corrupted by gender bias and presents with itself numerous challenges regularly.

Gender bias percolated in the legal institutions

The biggest and foremost deadlock is that there is no official survey done by the government or any other credible organisation on gender discrimination being conducted in the field of law. What we do know is that women in India constitute only about 30% of the lower judiciary, In high courts, women judges constitute 11.5% and in the Supreme Court, there currently are only 4 women justices out of the sitting 33. Of the 1.7 million advocates, only 15% are women. Only 2% of the elected representatives in the state bar councils are women and there is no woman member in the Bar Council of India.

This shows that even after about 100 since the abolition of the ban on women from practicing law in India, the legal profession still pertains to be male-dominated. This poses a big problem as, without any data to look at, the further problem-solving step cannot be done.

In an instance of the Delhi high court, Justice Rekha Palli was hearing a case, she was constantly being referred to as ‘sir’ by the lawyer, to which Justice Palli replied –

“I am not Sir. I hope you can make that out” to which the lawyer replies-

“Sorry, it’s because of the chair you are sitting in”.

This points out how young lawyers in the profession are getting influenced by gender bias. The institution is also to blame for this, gender roles are assumed at an early stage in a child’s life, and it is affecting their behaviour in professional life as well.

In another instance - Senior advocate Indira Jaising recently mentioned that a senior male lawyer referred to her as “that woman” while he referred to other male lawyers as “my learned friend” . This kind of discrimination can lead to gender hate and envy and the younger generation of professionals can easily get influenced by such gender bias.

The registry of the Supreme Court of India compiled the data on the status of judicial infrastructure which revealed that 26% of court complexes do not have a separate ladies’ toilet . This points towards that the idea of women judges were so unimaginable that the judicial infrastructure remained designed in a male-oriented fashion.

Legal system - A man’s world

Even the women who graduate from law school, working at junior levels in the legal profession are equal to their male counterparts, this does not translate to equal representation at the workplace or later at higher positions. Men are more likely to get a promotion than women even if they offer the same set of skills at work

This is also true for the legal profession. In a profession where gender diversity is particularly significant, the presence of women plays an important role in upholding the ideals of equality, fairness, and impartiality of the justice system, especially amongst disadvantaged groups.

The women who work in the legal profession also face multiple challenges:

As mentioned above the unwelcomeness of the judicial infrastructure poses a problem. This discourages women professionals as anyone who works would expect the bear minimum services at their place of work.

Even clients often tend to hire male representatives because they believe that women might not make every effort to represent them in court because of family commitments or personal issues.

Legal firms and senior lawyers have a preference for hiring men. Despite the availability of talented women, most corporations are reluctant to invest in them. The cost of maternity leave and benefits are also viewed negatively by many companies.

Women are equally represented in the majority of esteemed law schools and at the start of their legal careers, but after graduation, they do not have the same representation in their jobs or in higher positions. Even while there are more women today entering the legal field, particularly in the judiciary, their numbers decline as they advance, and systematic discrimination prevents them from moving up the ranks. Women are less likely to receive investments from law firms, for the fear that they might leave the profession later on for other reasons, this kind of mentality discourages employers from investing in women lawyers at pivotal stages in their careers.

Women lawyers are nearly always judged and compared to their male counterparts. Women are frequently compelled to prioritise their personal and work life. They must choose between getting married and receiving a promotion, which is a very tangible choice that a woman must or is expected to make because of the societal connotations that come with being a woman.

According to Pinky Anand an experienced lawyer “Daily, women face clients, lawyers, and judges, the majority of whom are men. It is perceived as cantankerous when they raise their voices to voice their opinions rather than assertiveness. In some cases, their merits are obscured by this perception, and they are labelled as aggressive.”

In a recent instance, a Pune court issued a notice which said- “it is repeatedly noticed that women advocates are arranging their hair in open court, which is disturbing the functioning of the court. Hence, women advocates are hereby notified to refrain from such act”

Orders like these being issued by such significant authorities such as a district court really tell how every action a women lawyer takes seems to be judged and how it is always onus on women to maintain decorum, this instance also hints towards the objectification of women lawyers which should not be tolerable.

Inflexible working hours, casual sexism in the courtrooms, and a toxic working environment has made the Indian judiciary a man’s world. Women lawyers and judges are constantly judged and questioned on their attire, conduct, and abilities. In a patriarchal society like India, where women are considered subordinates, men often find it hard to see a woman taking charge or holding the same titles as they do.

Inadequate representation leads to gender bias in courtrooms.

There is an inadequate female representation that can be directly linked to the bias which exists in the bar and courtrooms.

For instance, to highlight the difference in perspectives and upholding the dignity of women, in 2018 in the case state (govt. of NCT of Delhi) v. Pankaj Chaudhary, an all-women bench held that a woman cannot be inferred to be “loose moral character” even if she was “habituated to sexual intercourse” and has the right of refusal to submit herself to sexual intercourse to anyone”. On the other hand, there are numerous examples where male judges have been insensitive towards the victim, such as in 2020, in Rakesh B v. State of Karnataka. The court granted bail to a rape accused and commented that women’s falling asleep after rape, was “unbecoming of an Indian woman” . The statement was later removed from the court order after it received criticism for the misogynistic treatment of the rape victim.

Literature review

Beatrice Dinerman in her journal published in 1969 analyses that women in the legal profession have not progressed as far as we would like to think—or rather, the legal profession itself has not “grown” to the point where it is willing to accept women into its ranks on the same basis as men. For under a façade of sex equality in the legal profession, sex discrimination remains widespread.

Analysis

• Common forms of discrimination: The biggest obstacle for female professionals after college is landing their first job. Prospective employers have concerns about everything, including their commitment, skill, and willingness to "behave themselves" in a male setting. This hints at ingrained misconceptions about women's intelligence, drive, and emotional stability. (Beatrice Dinerman,951)
• The double standard: For female graduates who are successful in securing some type of legal position, a new set of prejudices comes to play- the practice common to many law firms is that female attorney’s receive less money than male attorney’s of comparable ability. A women lawyer’s services can be held at bargain rates since the competition for their services is minimal. (Beatrice Dinerman,952)

Another reason for the double pay standard centres around the limited scope of work for which women are hired to do–law librarian, drafting wills, clerical work, research etc–these are the types of positions for which women are felt to be “best suited", and they too tend to gravitate towards these professions where prejudice is less pervasive. They find it easier to fit in when they choose a legal specialization that isn't typically reserved for men. (Janette Barnes,277)

The double standard is not only limited to professional capability but, extends far into the area of behavioural and personal traits. confidence, drive, and ambition-are qualities, admired in men-and are looked upon with disfavour when they appear in a feminine personality since it goes against the stereotypical expectations of gender. The female professionals are subjected to contradicting and competing for their behavioural requirements. They need to be assertive yet kind, feminine yet professional. (Beatrice Dinerman,952)

Conclusion - Need for change

Women entering the legal profession are not in poor shape. Nearly half of the applicants taking law courses are women, through the Common Law Admission Test for National Law Universities, at State/Central Universities there are nearly 50% female students but as we examined in the legal profession there is a huge disparity.

Changes must be made on the grassroot level onward. Both the working environment and the justice system must be remodelled so that there exists a friendly environment for female professionals too, who can work freely without any interference.

The upper judiciary now doesn't have any reservation policy for women, while the subordinate judiciary's reservation policy varies by state, leading to irregularities. According to the former Chief Justice of India NV Raman "The representation of women in the judiciary is not a matter of charity but of right."

The Indian judiciary is responsible for protecting and defending fundamental rights, but it is clear that judges, who play key roles in the system, just like any other product of human intellect also exhibit and reflect society's emotions and sensitivities, Therefore by ensuring the presence of divergent voices is essential to neutralize the social evils of sexism, casteism and political extremism that are unethical to the notion of the judiciary

Having more gender representation in the courts would allow for having a more contextual and critical lens while taking up gender-related issues, this would not only make the institution more gender-neutral but, would further help them make more informed decisions and also increase public confidence in the judiciary. Women will be more inclined to uphold their rights and seek justice if there are more and more visible women in the judiciary.

The presence of diversity is quintessential to the legitimacy of the judiciary, and it translates the high-speaking values of the Constitution and the public’s trust through its practice and adjudication.

As of right now, our institution has so far failed horribly to safeguard diversity; and hence must strive relentlessly to provide justice to those who have been wronged.

.    .    .