In an unprecedented incident within the Supreme Court of India, Chief Justice BR Gavai was the target of an attempted shoe attack on October 6, 2025. The assailant, advocate Rakesh Kishore, allegedly threw a shoe at the Chief Justice during court proceedings, citing disrespect towards Sanatan Dharma as his motive. The shoe fell short of the bench, and Kishore was promptly restrained by security personnel.
Chief Justice’s Response:
On October 9, 2025, Chief Justice Gavai addressed the incident publicly for the first time. He expressed being “very shocked” by the event but emphasized that it is now considered a “forgotten chapter” by the bench. Justice Gavai’s composed response underscored the judiciary’s resilience in the face of such challenges. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, who was present during the proceedings, remarked that the attack was “an affront to the Supreme Court,” highlighting the gravity of the incident.
Legal and Institutional Repercussions:
In the aftermath, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) suspended advocate Rakesh Kishore’s membership, citing “grave misconduct.” Additionally, the Bar Council of India debarred him from practicing law, reinforcing the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining decorum and discipline within its ranks.
Law enforcement agencies have also taken swift action. The Bengaluru police registered a zero FIR against Kishore, initiating an investigation under relevant sections of Indian law pertaining to assault or criminal force used to deter a public servant or to dishonor a person.
Public and Political Reactions:
The incident has elicited strong reactions from various quarters. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan condemned the attack, attributing it to “poisonous communal propaganda” and likening it to past communal frenzies. He emphasized the need to scrutinize such ideologies to prevent further incidents.
Lawyers’ associations across Maharashtra and Goa have also expressed their outrage. The Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa labeled the act as “utterly reprehensible” and demanded a thorough investigation and strict punishment. The Nagpur District Bar Association criticized the incident as a “brazen attack on democracy,” underscoring the broader implications of the attack on judicial independence.
Conclusion:
The attempted shoe attack on Chief Justice BR Gavai serves as a stark reminder of the challenges faced by the judiciary in upholding the rule of law and maintaining institutional integrity. While the immediate response has been swift and decisive, the incident underscores the need for continued vigilance and commitment to the principles of justice and democracy. As the legal proceedings unfold, the judiciary’s resilience and adherence to constitutional values will be closely observed by the public and legal community alike.
