India's Supreme Court Under Fire: Upper-Caste Hindu Judges Hold Sway as Diversity Push Falters

New Delhi, November 23, 2025 – The retirement of Chief Justice Bhushan Ramakrishna Gavai today has cast a stark spotlight on a persistent issue plaguing India's highest judiciary: its overwhelming dominance by upper-caste Hindu men. With Gavai – the second Dalit to lead the court and the first from a Buddhist background – stepping down, the 33-judge bench now features just one Dalit judge and a single woman, amid calls for urgent reforms to reflect the nation's diverse populace.

Gavai's departure leaves the Supreme Court with at least 12 Brahmin judges – comprising 36% of the bench, despite Brahmins making up only about 4-5% of India's population, according to a 2020 Pew Research Center survey and 2011 census data. Another eight judges hail from other upper-caste Hindu communities, pushing the share of privileged Hindu strata to over 60%. In contrast, there are no judges from Scheduled Tribes (STs), which account for 8.6% of the population, and only five from Other Backward Classes (OBCs). Religious minorities fare little better: just four judges from non-Hindu faiths (one each from Muslim, Christian, Parsi, and Jain communities). Gender representation is equally dismal, with Justice B.V. Nagarathna as the lone woman on the bench in a country where women constitute 48.5% of the population.

This imbalance, critics argue, traces back to the roots of India's caste system within Hinduism, where Dalits – once known as "untouchables" – and other marginalized groups have long faced systemic barriers in education, employment, and social mobility. The legal profession, historically a bastion of upper-caste males, has perpetuated this through a narrow recruitment pipeline. "More and more women and disadvantaged people are entering the system but the numbers simply aren't high enough," said former Supreme Court Justice Madan Lokur. "Historically, the legal profession has been dominated by males, and mainly by those who are not from Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes."

The collegium system – a panel of the court's five senior-most judges responsible for appointments – prioritizes seniority, judgment quality, and integrity, but deliberations remain opaque, fueling accusations of nepotism and bias. Judges typically ascend to the Supreme Court in their late 50s after decades in lower courts or as advocates, a ladder that disadvantages those from underrepresented groups who often lack early access to elite law schools or influential networks. A 2022 survey found only 15% of Indian lawyers are women, though female representation in district judiciaries has risen to 38% as of 2024. Data from 2023 shows a similar pattern: of 33 judges, 30 were Hindu, with Brahmins alone holding 36.4% of seats, while SCs and OBCs – together over 60% of the population – accounted for just 12.1%.

Recent events have amplified the debate. In May 2025, the Supreme Court itself condemned caste-based discrimination within the judiciary, quashing the dismissal of a lower court judge from a marginalized caste whose performance reviews had suspiciously declined. "Just because he belongs to a lower caste, he is being targeted. It is a big problem in the high court," the bench observed. Gavai's tenure, enabled by affirmative action policies, highlighted progress: his father, a Dalit leader who converted to Buddhism, inspired his path. Yet, with multiple retirements slated for 2026, advocates fear a regression unless the collegium acts decisively.

Not everyone agrees the picture is as bleak as portrayed. Former Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who retired in November 2024, rejected claims of an "elite, male, Hindu upper-caste" stranglehold. He pointed to grassroots shifts, noting that over 50% of new district judiciary recruits are women – reaching 60-70% in some states – and that broader access to legal education will soon diversify higher echelons. "The higher judiciary reflects the legal profession's composition from about 10 years prior," Chandrachud said, adding that most judges are "first-time entrants" without dynastic ties. He acknowledged societal biases but emphasized robust internal redressal mechanisms.

Proposed fixes include broadening the candidate pool through early interventions in law schools and firms, as Chandrachud urged: "The effort we have to make is that the zone of consideration – the pool from which we recruit to the Supreme Court – is itself diverse." Greater transparency in collegium decisions has been floated, though Justice Lokur cautioned against it, insisting, "You have to trust the judges." A 2014 bid to overhaul the system via the National Judicial Appointments Commission was struck down by the court itself in 2015 for threatening judicial independence.