The Judiciary, one of the essential branches of the government of India, is responsible for upholding the rule of law in the country, therefore it becomes an essential responsibility of such a body to maintain the accessibility and inclusivity in the system for people with disability. Access to justice is a basic law and a fundamental right provided by Article 14 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and Article 2 and 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The top court in the country through multiple judgments has mentioned the same to be a fundamental right, viz., Anita Kushwaha V. Pushpa Sudan (2016), State of Maharashtra V. Chandrabhan (1983).
The judicial system of the country is quite rigid in the procedural aspect and has grown deficiencies in the form of rigidity in inclusivity of people with disability, especially at the lower level of judiciary, i.e., District courts. Though the top courts in the country are recognising the importance and seriousness of this issue, i.e., barring people from accessing justice, not to mention it becoming a hurdle for persons with disability in becoming a part of the Indian legal system through its recruitment process.
A pivotal legislative measure addressing these challenges is the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016. This Act expanded the definition of “person with disability” to include individuals with long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments, which, in interaction with various barriers, hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. This comprehensive definition underscores the Act’s intent to encompass a broad spectrum of disabilities, thereby promoting inclusivity. The RPwD Act mandates that government establishments provide reasonable accommodation and ensure that individuals with disabilities are not discriminated against in matters of employment. Section 20(4) of the Act specifically obligates employers to make appropriate modifications and adjustments to ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy equal rights and opportunities in employment. This provision is crucial in facilitating the inclusion of individuals with disabilities within the judicial services.
In a landmark development, the Supreme Court of India, on March 3, 2025, addressed the issue of inclusivity within the judicial services concerning visually impaired individuals. The Court took suo motu cognizance of Rule 6A of the Madhya Pradesh Services Examination (Recruitment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 1994, which excluded visually impaired and low vision candidates from participating in judicial service examinations. The bench, comprising of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, struck down this discriminatory provision, emphatically stating that “visually impaired and low vision candidates are eligible to participate in the selection for posts under the judicial service.” The Court further invalidated Rule 7 of the Madhya Pradesh Service Rules, which imposed additional requirements on Persons with Disabilities (PWD) candidates, such as a three-year practice period or securing an aggregate score of 70%. The order clarified that while educational and other qualifications, including a minimum aggregate score, are applicable, the additional stipulations of first-attempt clearance or mandatory practice experience are discriminatory and thus struck down. This order has far-reaching implications, ensuring that PWD candidates who participated in the selection process are now entitled to be considered for judicial service appointments, provided they meet the eligibility criteria. It also sets a precedent for other states, reinforcing that disability cannot be a ground for denying individuals the opportunity to serve in the judiciary.
In its ongoing efforts to promote inclusivity of persons with disability in judiciary, the Supreme Court released a handbook titled “Handbook Concerning Persons with Disabilities”. This handbook is intended to be served as a guide for judges and legal practitioners, advising them to avoid dehumanizing language and stereotype-perpetuating terms when referring to persons with disabilities. It emphasizes the importance of a “people-first approach,” encouraging the use of respectful and sensitive language in legal documents, orders, and judgments. The handbook also provides insights into reasonable accommodations for individuals with mental disabilities, highlighting that such accommodations might include quiet office spaces, changes in supervisory methods, and permission to work from home. This aligns with Section 20(4) of the RPwD Act, which advances the guarantee of reasonable accommodation to persons with mental disabilities.
While significant strides have been made towards inclusivity, challenges persist in fully integrating individuals with disabilities into the Indian judicial system. Physical infrastructure in many court premises remains inaccessible, lacking essential facilities such as ramps, tactile indicators, and accessible restrooms. Additionally, attitudinal barriers and a lack of awareness among court staff and legal professionals can impede the effective participation of persons with disabilities. To address these challenges, a multifaceted approach is necessary. The government and judiciary must ensure that all court buildings comply with accessibility standards to accommodate individuals with various disabilities. Sensitization programs must be conducted regularly for judges, lawyers, and particularly court staff to foster an inclusive environment and eliminate biases. Furthermore, existing recruitment policies should be reviewed and amended to eliminate discriminatory provisions and promote affirmative action for persons with disabilities. The integration of assistive technologies can also play a significant role in aiding individuals with disabilities in performing their duties effectively within the judicial system.
By implementing these measures, the Indian judiciary can, brick by brick, move closer to realizing the constitutional promise of equality and non-discrimination, ensuring that individuals with disabilities are not only beneficiaries of justice but also active participants in it.
Contributed by- Saubhagya Bansal