Shoe-Hurling at CJI: Supreme Court Seeks SCBA’s Suggestions to Prevent Such Misconduct
SC asks SCBA to suggest preventive measures after alleged shoe-throwing attempt on CJI BR Gavai
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it would frame preventive measures to avert instances of misconduct inside and outside court premises, following the October 6 incident in which Advocate Rakesh Kishore allegedly attempted to hurl a shoe at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai in open court.
The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, hearing the Supreme Court Bar Association’s (SCBA) plea, said the issue went beyond the individual incident and required a structural response to protect the dignity and safety of court spaces.
“We are expecting you (SCBA) to give some suggestions,” Justice Kant told the association’s representatives. “Just think how to prevent such incidents — whether in the Bar, inside or outside courtrooms. Tomorrow, the bar room or any chamber could also be vulnerable," he said.
The Bench noted that while it had earlier refrained from issuing notice to Kishore in the contempt proceedings, it was inclined to consider broader guidelines to curb unruly behaviour and ensure decorum within judicial institutions.
Justice Kant added, “Give us some good suggestions. We’ll take this up in December.”
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 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.
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. Rakesh Kishore
Hearing Date: November 12, 2025
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi