New Delhi (09.07.2026): The Supreme Court of India has questioned the constitutional validity of a 1993 Office Memorandum (OM) issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) that bars pregnant Indian Police Service (IPS) probationers from undergoing training.
The SC observed that a welfare measure meant to protect women cannot be used to deprive a medically fit officer of her right to continue training. The petition filed by Urvashi Sengar (IPS: 2023: MP) challenges the legality of the 1993 OM, contending that it violates the constitutional principles of equality, substantive gender justice and reasonable accommodation by imposing a blanket prohibition on pregnant women probationers.
The Bench sought the Centre’s response and asked whether Sengar could be allowed to join the ongoing Phase-II training programme, which commenced in June this year. During the hearing, the Court remarked that the policy was intended to protect women and not to deny them opportunities. It questioned the rationale behind preventing a woman officer from undergoing training if she is medically fit to do so.
The Bench also expressed reservations over the rigid nature of the policy, observing that recovery after childbirth differs from one woman to another. It indicated that a probationer who is medically fit to resume training within nine months of delivery should not automatically be disqualified under a blanket rule, and that such cases should instead be decided on the basis of an individual medical assessment.
SC Issues Notice To Centre Over Barring Pregnant IPS Probationers From Training
By IndianMandarins - 2026-07-09 14:14:00
New Delhi (09.07.2026): The Supreme Court of India has questioned the constitutional validity of a 1993 Office Memorandum (OM) issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) that bars pregnant Indian Police Service (IPS) probationers from undergoing training.
The SC observed that a welfare measure meant to protect women cannot be used to deprive a medically fit officer of her right to continue training. The petition filed by Urvashi Sengar (IPS: 2023: MP) challenges the legality of the 1993 OM, contending that it violates the constitutional principles of equality, substantive gender justice and reasonable accommodation by imposing a blanket prohibition on pregnant women probationers.
The Bench sought the Centre’s response and asked whether Sengar could be allowed to join the ongoing Phase-II training programme, which commenced in June this year. During the hearing, the Court remarked that the policy was intended to protect women and not to deny them opportunities. It questioned the rationale behind preventing a woman officer from undergoing training if she is medically fit to do so.
The Bench also expressed reservations over the rigid nature of the policy, observing that recovery after childbirth differs from one woman to another. It indicated that a probationer who is medically fit to resume training within nine months of delivery should not automatically be disqualified under a blanket rule, and that such cases should instead be decided on the basis of an individual medical assessment.
