20/05/2025
On May 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of India ruled that candidates must have at least three years of legal practice to be eligible for entry-level judicial service positions, such as Civil Judge (Junior Division). This decision was delivered by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih. 
Background
The ruling stemmed from challenges to the Madhya Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, which, following a 2002 amendment, required candidates to have a minimum of three years of legal practice before appearing for judicial service examinations. This requirement was later adopted by several other states. 
Previously, in a 2002 judgment, the Supreme Court had removed the mandatory practice requirement, based on recommendations from the Shetty Commission. The Commission suggested that the three-year practice mandate deterred talented law graduates from joining the judiciary, proposing instead a structured training program for fresh graduates.  
Recent Developments
In recent years, various High Courts and state governments expressed concerns about the effectiveness of judges without practical legal experience. They argued that prior courtroom exposure is essential for the efficient functioning of judicial officers. This led to a reevaluation of the earlier stance, culminating in the Supreme Court’s current decision to reinstate the practice requirement.  
Implications
This ruling standardizes the eligibility criteria across states, emphasizing the importance of practical legal experience for judicial candidates. It aims to ensure that new judges possess the necessary skills and understanding of courtroom procedures, thereby enhancing the quality of judicial services.
For aspiring judges, this means that accumulating at least three years of legal practice is now a prerequisite for entering the judicial service. This change may influence the career planning and preparation strategies of law graduates aiming for judicial positions.
