‘Can’t be brushed aside’: SC backs Bar rooms for women, fund for lawyers

The petition by women advocates contended that the lack of such infrastructure adversely affected their ability to discharge their professional responsibilities.

The petitioners also placed on record the results of a survey they undertook, which revealed that “in the majority of the Court Complexes, either no dedicated Ladies’ Bar Room exists or the facilities provided therein are wholly inadequate, lacking essentials such as sufficient seating arrangements, clean washrooms, changing spaces, nursing facilities, and other amenities necessary for the effective discharge of professional responsibilities by women members of the Bar”.

‘Spaces for women…indispensable condition’

Appearing for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Monika Gusai, said that “the actual position of the ladies’ bar rooms is pathetic. Especially within 50 km of this court.”

She pointed out that in a city like Ghaziabad, there is no ladies’ bar room at all. “It’s just like the feeling is we are not supposed to be there. We are not to be seen,” the counsel said, adding that she has heard that women advocates are supposed to be there from 10 to 1 only. “Once you send away your children to school and husband to the office come to the court. And by 1 o’clock, go back. We don’t have any facilities, so we cannot stay back till 4 o’clock,” she submitted.

The court said the “the concern raised by the petitioners cannot be brushed aside as a matter of mere convenience. The legal profession has witnessed a steady and encouraging increase in the participation of women over the last few decades. However, the mere opening of doors alone cannot be a sufficient cause for celebration. In order for their participation to be made meaningful, it must be accompanied by the creation of conditions that enable women advocates to discharge their professional responsibilities effectively, safely, and on equal terms. The availability of adequately equipped spaces for women professionals within court complexes is one such indispensable condition.”

The bench said that a court complex may appear to be a designated venue where legal proceedings are conducted, but those “who live their lives in service of the law know it to be much more”. “It functions as a workplace where substantial portions of their professional lives are spent and, not infrequently, assumes the character of a second home. Most of the advocates spend long hours preparing matters, interacting with clients, consulting colleagues, and discharging their duties within these premises. They rely on such common amenities because many advocates cannot afford to maintain their own offices, appoint staff, and purchase the required digital and physical resources. In fact, the absence of a designated area where such basic facilities are made available to women, disproportionately impacts them and may, in certain cases, discourage them from continuing practice,” the court said.

The bench said that “when women advocates are required to spend substantial portions of their day within court premises, the availability of basic infrastructure necessary for their comfort, privacy, safety, and professional functioning assumes utmost significance. The issue, therefore, transcends the realm of administrative convenience and touches upon values that lie at the heart of the constitutional guarantee of dignity and equal participation in public life”.

Court flags brain drain

The court also backed their demand to set up a create a ‘Young Lawyers’ Professional Assistance Fund’ to provide financial support to young advocates during the formative years of their legal careers, saying financial hardships often compels capable and promising young lawyers to abandon practice at the Bar altogether.

“We apprehend that such attrition may produce a form of professional brain drain, diminishing the ability of the Bar to attract and retain the young and meritorious,” the bench said.

It suggested that as regards the source of funding, “all the stakeholders ought to consider the desirability of enacting a suitable law providing for a structured mechanism of donation and contribution by the successful senior advocates and other practicing lawyers with adequate professional experience in the country. In addition, the Union of India and the states ought to contribute a part of the court fee collected by the judiciary towards that fund. Similarly, the courts can also divert a substantial part of the costs imposed in judicial proceedings as a contribution to that fund.”