‘If only men menstruated...’: SC on firing women judges
The Supreme Court questioned Madhya Pradesh's decision to dismiss a woman judge for low case disposal, highlighting her trauma from a miscarriage.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned Madhya Pradesh high court’s decision to sack a woman civil judge for low disposal of cases, noting that the court ignored her physical and mental trauma following a miscarriage.

“I wish men had menstruation, then only they would understand,” justice BV Nagarathna observed while hearing a suo motu petition on the dismissal of six women civil judges in Madhya Pradesh. Four of them were reinstated following the top court’s intervention in September.
“It is easy to say case dismissed and go home. If we are hearing this matter at length, can lawyers say we are slow? Particularly women, if they are suffering physically and mentally; do not say they are slow and terminate them,” justice Nagarathna said.
The bench was considering cases of civil judges Aditi Kumar Sharma and Sarita Chaudhary, who joined MP judicial service in 2018 and 2017 respectively. The MP high court’s full court refused to revoke termination orders against them, recording adverse remarks in a sealed cover submitted to the Supreme Court. Both officers were terminated in 2023.
Records submitted by HC advocate Arjun Garg showed Sharma’s performance dropped from “very good” and “good” ratings in 2019-20 to “average” and “poor” in subsequent years. In 2022, she had about 1,500 pending cases with disposal rate below 200. She earned 44.16 units for civil cases and 269 units for criminal cases.
Sharma informed the HC that she suffered a miscarriage in 2021, followed by her brother’s cancer diagnosis. “Let there be the same criteria for male judges and judicial officers. We will see then. How can you have target units for district judiciary,” justice Nagarathna, who was on the bench with justice N Kotiswar Singh, said.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing Sharma, said her client had an impeccable record and faced complaints due to professional and personal rivalry.
Amicus curiae Gaurav Agarwal noted that Sharma’s 2022 annual confidential report was recorded by then district judge (inspection) Anuradha Shukla of Jabalpur zone, who later became Ratlam’s principal district judge and is now a MP high court judge.
The court sought clarifications from the HC on criteria for terminating civil judges and scheduled further hearing for December 12.
The judicial officers claimed their termination violated fundamental rights under Articles 14 (right to equality before law) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty).
