Shoe-Hurling at CJI: SC to Hear SCBA’s Contempt Plea Against Advocate Rakesh Kishore on Oct 27
The Supreme Court will on October 27 hear the SCBA’s petition seeking criminal contempt action against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who allegedly tried to hurl a shoe at Chief Justice BR Gavai during court proceedings
On October 6, Advocate Rakesh Kishore attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai inside Court Hall No. 1, during a Supreme Court hearing
The Supreme Court will hear on Monday, October 27, a petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) seeking initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who allegedly attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai during court proceedings on October 6.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi is scheduled to hear the matter.
On October 16, SCBA President and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh had mentioned the matter before Justice Kant’s Bench, informing that the Attorney General for India had granted consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the advocate. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also supported the plea.
However, the Bench expressed reservations about whether pursuing contempt action would serve any meaningful purpose. It observed that since CJI Gavai himself had chosen not to take any action, it might be better to allow the controversy to “die a natural death.” “The Chief Justice of India has himself decided not to pursue the issue. Why should we revive it and give it fresh life?” the Bench had remarked, adding that the Court’s time might be better utilised for cases of greater public importance.
Singh, however, insisted that the matter concerns the “honour and dignity of the institution.” He argued that the advocate’s conduct cannot be ignored merely because the CJI personally chose to let it go, particularly since the individual in question has continued to give statements to the media justifying his act. Singh further told the Bench that social media users were glorifying the attack, creating a narrative that undermines public confidence in the judiciary. He added that the SCBA has also sought a “John Doe” order against such posts promoting or defending the act.
Importantly, on October 9, in a rare public statement, Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai had addressed the attempted shoe attack on him in the Supreme Court on Monday, i.e. October 6, describing the incident as a shocking moment but one that the Bench now considers a “forgotten chapter.”
The SCBA had terminated the temporary membership of Advocate Rakesh Kishore. Within hours of the incident, the Bar Council of India (BCI) suspended Kishore’s licence to practice law, calling the act violative of "the Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette". The BCI a show cause notice to Kishore requiring him to explain, within 15 days, why the suspension should not continue. All courts and Bar Associations were also notified, and any court-issued identity or access passes held by Kishore had been rendered inoperative.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had condemned the attack, describing it as a consequence of misinformation spread online about the judiciary. He urged restraint and caution against narratives that distort public faith in courts. Political and legal bodies, including the CPI(M) and the All India Lawyers’ Union (AILU), condemned the incident, terming it an “attack on the judiciary and the Constitution.” They demanded for strong action against those promoting hostility towards the courts.
The All India Bar Association (AIBA) urged authorities to register an FIR against Kishore, calling his conduct "disturbing" and "unprecedented". AIBA Chairman Dr. Adish C Aggarwala emphasised that police must act swiftly to preserve the dignity of constitutional institutions. Following the incident, the authorities said that over 700 police and security personnel remain stationed at the Supreme Court complex daily. The Delhi Police released Advocate Kishore after brief detention since no formal complaint was filed by the Supreme Court officials. Citing procedural norms, police officials said no FIR could be registered without a complaint from the court’s administration.
In a related development, activist Suraj Kumar Bauddh sought the Attorney General’s consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against individuals, including YouTuber Ajeet Bharti, over online remarks threatening the CJI.
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. Rakesh Kishore
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi