3 Year Bar Practice Rule ensures Judicial Maturity, yet Women Aspirants may bear the Cost: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court has said the restoration of a mandatory 3 year practice requirement for entry-level judicial service addresses long-standing concerns about judicial preparedness, while cautioning that the rule may unintentionally disadvantage women candidates. His remarks come amid ongoing debate over the impact of the eligibility condition on aspiring judges across the country.

Speaking at a seminar hosted by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy, Justice Bhuyan underscored the importance of courtroom experience before joining the Bench. He noted that hands-on exposure at the Bar equips young lawyers with practical insight into court discipline, litigant behaviour and the gravity of adjudicatory responsibility, qualities not found in textbooks.

At the same time, he acknowledged the structural challenges facing fresh practitioners, particularly those from non-metropolitan backgrounds who encounter financial instability in their formative years. He pointed out that the waiting period may also create additional pressure on women aspirants, especially from smaller towns, where social expectations around marriage can interrupt career trajectories.

Reflecting on the broader implications, Justice Bhuyan observed, “This decision addresses a concern which many had felt over time,” while adding that “what impact the three years' experience requirement may have on women aspirants… is something which only future will tell.” His comments come even as the Supreme Court has permitted open-court hearings in review petitions challenging the reinstated eligibility rule, signalling that the issue remains under judicial consideration.

Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.