The indian judiciary is often described as the “guardian of equality.”
But when the Lok Sabha itself reveals that out of 841 judges appointed between 2018 and 2025, only 3.8% are from the Scheduled Castes, the gap between constitutional ideals and ground reality becomes impossible to ignore.

Add to that a 5.5% share for all minorities combined, 12.2% for OBCs, and 2% for STs, and the picture gets darker.

What emerges is not just an imbalance — but a structural tilt created by closed-door appointments, opaque interviews, and gatekeeping committees.

A system where “merit” is decided in secrecy, and representation vanishes in the shadows.

Here’s the breakdown — raw, blunt, and unfiltered.

1. 841 Judges → Only 3.8% SC: The Statistic That Stings

For a community constituting 16.6% of India’s population, getting 3.8% of judicial appointments isn’t under-representation — it’s near exclusion.
This isn’t a small statistical skew.
This is a canyon.

2. 52% OBC population → Only 12.2% Judges

OBCs form a majority of India, yet they occupy barely one-eighth of judicial positions.
When a majority becomes a minority in appointments, the system isn’t neutral — it’s structurally tilted.

3. Minorities (21% Combined) → Only 5.5% Judges

Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis = 21% of India.
Judicial share = 5.5%.
That’s not diversity — that’s a token sample data-size.

4. STs: 8.6% population → 2% Judges

India’s most vulnerable communities end up with the smallest voice in the system that should protect them the most.
The irony is painful.
The impact is generational.

5. Meanwhile, One Group Holds 76.45% of All Judicial Appointments

When 22.8% of India’s population holds over three-fourths of all judicial seats, the imbalance is not accidental — it’s entrenched.
It’s the outcome of a closed pipeline, not a level playing field.

6. The Government’s Own Admission: “Reservation Not Followed in Judiciary”

In his reply to mp T.R. Baalu, minister Ramdas Athawale confirmed what activists have shouted for years:
Judicial appointments don’t follow reservation at all.

No quotas.
No safeguards.
No structural correction.

Just a system that selects from the same circles that have always held power.

7. The Selection Process: The Less You See, the More You Should Worry

Appointments depend on:

• Collegium recommendations

• Government concurrence

• Interviews behind closed doors

• Evaluation with no public transparency

• 
  

No written exams.
No standardized scoring.
No accountability.

It’s a machine designed to produce only one kind of judge.

8. When Processes Hide, Power Decides

Opaque systems don’t just fail to include — they actively filter out.

The gatekeepers choose people who “fit,” people who “belong,” people who “match” the system’s existing power structure.

Merit?
Or cultural familiarity?

Many indians are asking the question.

9. And While Representation Shrinks, EWS Expands the Dominant Share

Reservation exists for SC, ST, OBC in many sectors — but the judiciary is exempt.
And in sectors where reservation DOES exist, the introduction of EWS — a quota that applies solely to the general category — further expands their share.

It’s the exact opposite of correcting an imbalance.

10. The Final Punch: A Judiciary That Doesn’t Reflect india Cannot Deliver Justice to India

If courts don’t look like the people…
If judges don’t come from the people…
If diversity is the exception and privilege is the default…

Then justice becomes a mirror — reflecting only those already at the top.

Representation is not a favor.

It’s the foundation of trust in the system.
And right now, that foundation is showing cracks.