Enough is enough: SC tells lawyer over comment on number of women judges in apex court

“Enough is enough. Don’t mess with the court,” an irked Supreme Court on Monday said after a lawyer claimed that advocates in the Delhi High Court have questioned the lack of adequate representation of women judges in the top court.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a batch of pleas seeking 33 per cent reservation of seats for women lawyers in the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA).

During the hearing, an advocate appearing in the matter said lawyers at the high court were asking how many women judges there are in the Supreme Court.

Justice Surya Kant said, “If you are to play to the gallery by saying all these things, then please do. Say it 10 times.

“You are adding fuel to the fire. Let the media hear it. Don’t mess with the court. Enough is enough. Pathetic. This is not the way the bar conducts itself,” he said.

The annoyed bench refused to hear any further explanation from the bar body.

“We won’t hear anything. Now, we will go into the larger issue of the matter and decide the issue finally,” it said.

The bench fixed November 29 for final arguments and said the judgment on the issue will be pronounced thereafter in three days.

The top court saw the video clips submitted by senior advocate and DHCBA president Mohit Mathur on deliberations over the issue of 33 per cent reservation in the bar body that took place at the general body meeting.

It noted that eight video clips were submitted on the deliberations that took place at the general body meeting of the DHCBA, out of which only three were relevant.

The counsel for petitioners said the DHCBA, despite express direction of the top court, is offering a post of joint treasurer which is only a “ceremonial post”.

On November 13, the top court had said it would like to watch the video of the general body meeting of DHCBA to see the “quality and kind” of deliberations held on the issue of women reservation in the bar body.

The top court was informed that in the general body meeting, the proposal for reserving the seats for women was not passed.

It had said the court would like to see whether the proposal for reserving five posts for women in the 15-member executive body of the DHCBA moved in pursuance of its September 26 order was rejected after due deliberations and thorough reasoning.

On September 26, the top court directed the DHCBA to have the post of treasurer reserved for the women beside one other post in the five-member office-bearer body of the association.

“The general body of the bar association shall consider to reserve the post of the treasurer exclusively for the women members of the bar association,” the bench had directed.

It had added that in addition to reserving the post of treasurer for women members, the general body shall also be free to consider the desirability of reserving one more post of office-bearer for women members of the bar association.

“Similarly, out of 10 executive members, there shall be at least three women members. The general body may also resolve that out of three women members of the executive committee, one at least will be a senior designated advocate,” it had directed.

The top court had then directed the general body meeting to be held preferably in 10 days.

It had asked Mathur to even urge the bar bodies of the district courts to have similar arrangements in place.

The executive committee of the high court bar association has 15 members, including five office-bearers. On May 2, in a significant order aimed at increasing the representation of women at the bar, the top court had directed that 33 per cent posts in the executive committee of the SCBA be reserved for women members.