'Bar Practice is not a Barrier, inexperience on the Bench is': Justice Nagarathna tears into 'Negative Attitude' of Law Students toward 3 Year rule, calls it the Soul of Judicial Competence

In a pointed and candid address at Chanakya National Law University, Patna, Supreme Court Justice BV Nagarathna pushed back forcefully against the suggestion that mandatory pre-service Bar practice discourages women from entering the judiciary, arguing instead that practical courtroom experience is the bedrock of competent adjudication, and that any erosion of that foundation puts the entire justice delivery system at risk.

The debate ignited when CNLU Vice Chancellor Professor Faizan Mustafa suggested that the Supreme Court's ruling requiring three years of Bar practice before entry into judicial service creates a barrier for women aspirants. Justice Nagarathna, with nearly four decades at the Bar herself, rejected that framing entirely, contending that the real danger lies in appointing judges who have never stood before a bench to argue a case, never filed an affidavit to restore a matter dismissed for default, and never navigated the pressures of live litigation, skills she argued cannot be absorbed from a textbook or acquired behind a classroom desk.

Justice Nagarathna was unsparing in her assessment, anchoring her reasoning in practical reality rather than policy theory. Addressing the suggestion that three years of practice amounts to lost time, she declared that the requirement was not punitive but formative, observing that even the three-year threshold may fall short of what genuine judicial competence demands. On the question of whether a young, inexperienced appointee could effectively handle capital matters, she warned that a thirty-year-old judge lacking seasoned judgment, presiding over POCSO cases carrying the death penalty, could trigger a cascade of references that overwhelm the High Courts.

On the much debated "Master of the Roster" convention, she clarified that the Chief Justice's authority is spent the moment a case is assigned, what follows belongs entirely to the conscience of the individual judge, adding pointedly, "Did anybody predict I would dissent in so many cases?" She further called on governments to ensure at least thirty percent of law officer appointments at the Centre, States, and public sector bodies go to women, arguing that visibility in courtrooms is the most reliable pipeline to the bench.

The address concluded with a caution to law students against over-reliance on artificial intelligence in drafting legal pleadings.

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