The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the Army’s policy reserving vacancies in the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch based on gender is unconstitutional and violates the principle of gender neutrality. The court criticized the practice of creating separate merit lists for male and female candidates, highlighting instances where female candidates outperformed their male counterparts yet were excluded from selection due to arbitrary quotas. The justices emphasized that if women can partake in roles such as piloting Rafale jets or leading convoys in conflict zones, they should not face restrictions in recruitment for the JAG. The ruling mandates a common merit list for all candidates and directs future recruitments without gender-based allocations, reinforcing that no barriers should obstruct deserving candidates based on gender. This decision not only aims to enhance equality within the Indian Armed Forces but also serves to bolster the operational efficiency of the military by leveraging the full potential of qualified personnel, regardless of gender. The Supreme Court’s stance underscores a significant shift towards inclusivity and meritocracy, aligning military recruitment policies with constitutional mandates and modern operational realities.