Legal practice in India, as in most other countries, is a male dominated profession. In 1916, the Calcutta High Court, and in 1922, the Patna High Court had held that women otherwise qualified were not entitled to be enrolled as Vakil or Pleader. In the Patna High Court case, Ms. Hazra, the petitioner, secured a Law degree from Calcutta University. She was refused enrolment as a Pleader. She challenged this in the High Court of Patna. The Court ruled that the sections of the Legal Practitioner's Act referred to males and not females. Since 1973. no woman had ever been admitted to the roll of pleaders. To remove doubts about the eligibility of women to be enrolled and to practice as legal practitioners: the Legal Practitioners (Women) Act, XXIII of 1923, was enacted to expressly provide that no woman would by reason only of her sex disqualified from being admitted or enrolled as a legal practitioner or from practicing as such. The Allahabad High Court took the lead by enrolling Ms. Cornelia Sorabjee the first Indian lady Vakil of the Allahabad High Court on 24 August, 1921 by a decision of the English Committee of the court (as the Administrative Committee was then called), consisting of Chief Justice Sir Grim Wood Meers. Since then, although the number of women entering into the profession has increased gender bias still pervades the profession.

Why was Ms. Hazra refused to be enrolled as a Pleader?

Because Patna Court stated that Legal Practitioner's Act referred to males and not females

The correct answer is Option (3) → Because Patna Court stated that Legal Practitioner's Act referred to males and not females