Women soldiers patrol in Sadhna Pass in the J&K’s Purchari district. Picture for representation. | Photo Credit: PTI
On Monday (11 August 2025), the Supreme Court asked why the army could not deploy female officers to face terror and rebellion in an emergency, if other armed forces such as Air Force were sent for enemy lines in nozzles, helicopters and falls.
The question came from the judgment pronounced by the Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan, who hit the army policy restricting the appointment of female officers at the branch of the general advocate (JAG). Women’s candidates were represented by the head of the lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan.
The bench said that candidates to expand policy on the basis of gender and reserve other contributions for men did not meet the standards of law.
The judgment created by Judge Manmohan explained that the court did not impose its views on the army, but carried out the constitution and mandate of law. “No nation can be safe when half of his population (ie her female strength) is detained,” remarked justice Manmohan.
He ordered the Union’s government to publish a common list of merit for all candidates JAG, Men and Women and publish grades.
The Top Court dismissed the Union Government’s argument that Jag’s branch consisted of “exclusively warriors” because it was a reserve for mobilization. The Court said this statement was contrary to the right of women to form part of all combat support for arms services. Furthermore, it violated women’s right to treat as equal in all aspects of their employment in the army. In addition, the court noted that with more than 1.4 million active, 2.1 million reserves and 1.3 million paramilitary employees compared to only 285 JAG officers, it would be an extreme section to claim that women should be excluded because JAG may be deployed during the war.
The Court said that the argument of the center that female officers were not deployed for counter -relay or in the anti -terrorism, because it was not expected that in the case of armed conflicts, the role of fighters ”had no legislative sanction or foundation.
Justice Manmohan said that other armed forces did not reduce the appointment of women in combat contributions. The Air Force constantly opens new roles of combat air forces for women such as fighter pilots, pilots of helicopters, etc.
“When female officers as captain Ojaswita Shree from a parachute parachute, the main Dwipannita Kalita from the highly specialized air medical unit of the army and flights Lieutenant Shivangi Singh (pilot rafale beam) can be hostile for hostile forces. The infantry/artillery units, ”the top court questioned.
The Court of Justice decided that if female officers could entrust complex tasks such as transporting convoys of 30 to 50 vehicles through militant areas in Leh, Srinagar, Udhampur and in the northeast, why they cannot rely on operational areas.
“For example, Major Gopika Bhatti commanded a convoy from Leh to Pathankot in 2010, supervising junior authorized officers and jaws, managing logistics, weapons and ammunition. Women such as Colonel Anshu Jamwal have been actively involved in Peace, which was actively involved. Israeli, and is what is concerned and is what is concerned, and is what is concerned, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Ethiopia, Ethiopia and Israel, Ilubality, Ispir, Ispir, Ispir. Zones such as Syria.
“This court understands that people are always afraid of changes. But as Bill Gates, co -founder Microsoft, he said great,” People feared electricity when it was invented. No? “Justice Manmohan wrote.
Published – August 11 2025 22:45 is
