The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the applicability of 1993 Office Memorandum (OM) of Home affairs ministry that barred women IPS probationers from training for a year after they deliver a child.
A bench led by Justice Manoj Misra said the OM should be construed in a woman's favor and not otherwise, as was done in the case before it.
The OM was meant to ensure a woman IPS officer is not forced to undertake the physical training programme during her probationary period.
However, it did not intend to disentitle an officer who was medically fit and willing to commence training, even before the expiry of the one-year timeline, the bench said.
Hearing a petition filed by IPS officer Urvashi Sengar, the court sought the Centre's response by Thursday and asked it to clarify whether she could be permitted to join the Phase-II training programme, which commenced in June this year.
The court further asked the Centre, “When the purpose of this OM is to enable training of a fit woman, then why are you stopping her if she is fit?”
The bench also observed that a blanket rule may not be appropriate, noting that while some women may be fit to resume training within nine months of childbirth, others may require much longer. It indicated that such cases should be assessed individually rather than through a rigid policy.
What is the case of Urvashi Sengar?
Urvashi Sengar, a 2023-batch direct recruit IPS officer allotted the Madhya Pradesh cadre, joined the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel National Police Academy for Phase-I training in November 2023.
While undergoing Phase-II training in April 2025, which primarily comprises classroom sessions, academic modules and institutional attachments, she became pregnant and informed the authorities.
She delivered her child on September 20, 2025. With the next Phase-II training scheduled to begin on June 20, 2026 – around nine months after childbirth – she sought permission to join, stating that she was medically fit.
The academy, however declined her request stating the 1993 OM, and informed her that she could join only with the next batch.
Sengar then approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which, in an interim order on May 27, allowed her to participate in the training subject to medical fitness and other formalities.
Although the police academy initially issued a letter on June 16 permitting her to join, it withdrew the communication within two days.
The Centre subsequently challenged the CAT's order before the Delhi High Court, which stayed the tribunal's direction on June 22, observing that the policy was intended to safeguard the welfare of both the IPS probationer and the infant.
