'Give Suggestions To Prevent Such Incidents': Supreme Court Adjourns SCBA's Contempt Plea Over Shoe-Hurling Bid At CJI

The Supreme Court today adjourned the contempt petition filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who attempted to throw a shoe at CJI BR Gavai on October 6 over his remarks in the Vishnu Idol case.

The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi had earlier expressed reluctance to initiate criminal contempt proceedings, observing that it would instead focus on framing guidelines to prevent such incidents in the future

Today, Justice Kant asked the lawyers to give their suggestions for guidelines. "Just think of how to prevent such incidents in court premises, bar room, etc. All of you please give suggestions. Whatever requires to be resolved, we will...on the next date, we will request Attorney General also," Justice Kant said.

To recap, on October 27, Justice Kant acknowledged that Kishore's conduct “amounted to serious and grave criminal contempt". But, the bench questioned whether it could initiate contempt proceedings against Kishore, when the CJI himself had chosen to pardon the act. SCBA pointed out that the CJI pardoned Kishore in his personal capacity and that the Advocate later gave media interviews boasting about the act. It deprecated how the incident was glorified and highlighted that CJI's pardoning could not bind the institution. The bench however was seemingly not convinced. Yet, it expressed that it would examine the John Doe order aspect and see if certain guidelines can be laid down.

In related news, the Delhi High Court today remarked that incidents like Kishore's shoe-hurling at CJI Gavai in open court must "not only be deprecated but appropriate measures need to be taken". Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, dealing with a PIL seeking take-down of the video of the incident, said that the incident not only hurt members of the Bar but everybody.

Background

In an unusual incident at the Supreme Court on October 6, a person, later identified as Advocate Rakesh Kishore, attempted to throw an object at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai while the judge was holding Court.

As per accounts of lawyers present in the Chief Justice's Court at the time, Kishore shouted slogans but was quickly escorted out of the courtroom by security personnel. He reportedly raised the slogan - “Sanatan Dharam ka apmaan nahi sahega Hindustan” (“India will not tolerate disrespect towards Sanatan Dharma”) while being removed from the courtroom.

The incident shocked and attracted widespread criticism from the legal community. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi, Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, Chief Ministers MK Stalin, Pinarayi Vijayan, Siddaramaiah, Revanth Reddy, Mamata Banerjee, among other political leaders, also condemned the act and expressed solidarity with the CJI.

Subsequently, the Supreme Court Bar Association filed a petition seeking criminal contempt proceedings against Kishore. On October 16, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh (SCBA President) mentioned the matter before Justice Kant's bench, informing that the Attorney General for India had granted consent to initiate the contempt proceedings. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta also backed the plea.

However, the bench expressed reservations about pursuing contempt action, wondering if it would revive the issue again. Pointing out that CJI Gavai himself had decided not to pursue action against Kishore, the bench suggested that it would be wise to let the issue die its natural death. It also wondered if the Court should spend time on the matter at the cost of more pressing cases.

SCBA however stressed that the issue related to the honor of the institution and pointed out that Kishore was giving media statements justifying his act. It also raised concerns about social media users who were glorifying the attack on the CJI and sought a "John Doe" order against such posts. Accordingly, the matter came to be listed.

Case Title: SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION v. RAKESH KISHORE | CONMT.PET.(Crl.) No. 1/2025