CJI shoe attack: Attorney general okays contempt action against Rakesh Kishore

India’s attorney general R. Venkataramani has approved criminal contempt proceedings against advocate Rakesh Kishore, who audaciously sought to fling a shoe at Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai within the revered chambers of the Supreme Court, a shocking affront to the sanctity of India’s highest court and highest juridical office.

In his letter granting consent to senior advocate Vikas Singh to initiate a criminal contempt petition against Kishore, the attorney general observed that any act of throwing or attempting to hurl an object at judges or shouting at them in open court to malign the conduct of proceedings constitutes a scandalous affront to the dignity and majesty of Justice itself.

"No person can have any reason whatsoever to scandalise the Court. Throwing or attempting to throw any object aimed at the hon'ble judges, or shouting at judges to find fault with the conduct of proceedings will be scandalous. The reason said to have been given by Mr Rakesh Kishore, can never be in justification of such scandalous conduct,” reads Venkataramani’s letter of consent, received and shared by LiveLaw.in.

“Such acts constitute a grave affront to the dignity of the Court and to the rule of law itself. From the materials placed on record, I find Mr Rakesh Kishore has not shown any repentance as regards the conduct in question, as is evident from his subsequent utterances,” the attorney general added

The incident has sparked widespread debate on social media — on action that should be taken as well as intent (does it count as a casteist attack? or simply religious fundamentalism or anti-secular?) — and the matter was brought before a bench led by justice J. Surya Kant, highlighting the gravity of the matter.

The bench looked to solicitor general Tushar Mehta and senior advocate Vikas Singh, president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, for their responses.

Singh remarked on the audacity of the act (though not an unprecedented one), juxtaposed against the the flippant attitude of the accused to its gravity: “[Kishore] is further saying he has no remorse.”

Mehta noted, “Some people are glorifying it… saying it’s too late to have done this,” emphasising another troubling narrative emerging in the public sphere that glorifies Kishore for upholding the dignity of Hindutva.

In response, Justice Surya Kant lauded the composure of the CJI, observing, “Hon’ble CJI has been magnanimous… that shows the institution is not affected by these kinds of incidents.” Other peers too have underscored CJI Gavai’s upholding of the resilience and dignity of India’s highest judicial office in the face of extreme provocation.

The episode, which has reverberated across legal and social circles, does however highlight the need to reinforce the decorum and respect due to the judiciary offices in India — and could become an example of the consequences for such reckless defiance, going beyond basic contempt of court.

Will such an example be made of Adv. Rakesh Kishore now?