The Supreme Court of India is contemplating initiating contempt proceedings against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who allegedly attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai during a court session on October 6. The incident has raised significant concerns regarding courtroom decorum and the influence of social media on public discourse.
On October 6, Advocate Rakesh Kishore reportedly hurled a shoe at CJI Gavai in Court Hall No. 1. The Chief Justice remained composed, directing the continuation of proceedings despite the disruption. Kishore, aged 71, allegedly shouted slogans related to Sanatan Dharma before being restrained by security personnel. He later claimed that his actions were a reaction to perceived disrespect towards Hindu beliefs in a prior case involving the restoration of a Vishnu idol.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) swiftly suspended Kishore’s license, condemning the act as inconsistent with the dignity of the legal profession. Disciplinary proceedings are underway. The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) also revoked his temporary membership and access to court premises.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that Attorney General R. Venkataramani had granted consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Kishore. However, the bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, expressed concern that pursuing the matter might revive a closed issue and potentially fuel further social media debates. The court indicated it would consider the case after the Diwali vacation.
The incident has highlighted the role of unregulated social media in influencing public opinion and behavior. Punjab Police have registered multiple FIRs against individuals making casteist remarks targeting CJI Gavai online, with over 100 social media accounts under scrutiny. The Supreme Court has cautioned against the ill effects of such unregulated platforms, emphasizing the need for responsible online conduct.
This episode underscores the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain the dignity of judicial institutions. While dissent is a fundamental right, it must be exercised within the bounds of law and respect for constitutional authorities. The Supreme Court’s deliberation on this matter will likely set a precedent for handling similar incidents in the future.
As the nation observes the developments, the legal community and the public await the Supreme Court’s decision on whether to proceed with contempt proceedings against Advocate Rakesh Kishore.
