The Supreme Court was on Thursday informed that the Attorney General has granted consent to initiate contempt of court proceedings against advocate Rakesh Kishore, who hurled a shoe at Chief Justice of India B R Gavai earlier this month.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was apprised of this by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president and senior advocate Vikas Singh. They urged the bench to take up the contempt case against Kishore, citing the gravity of the incident.
Social Media Outrage
Singh told the bench that social media has gone “berserk” since the October 6 incident, with widespread circulation of videos and posts that, in his words, demean the institutional integrity and dignity of the judiciary. Mehta and Singh also requested the court to consider passing a restraining order on social media to curb the flood of “demeaning comments”.
The bench responded by observing that the right to freedom of speech and expression is not absolute. “It cannot be at the cost of the integrity and dignity of others,” the bench said, while reflecting on the ill-effects of the “unregulated” nature of social media. “We are both product and consumer of the content,” the bench remarked.
Court Not in a Rush to List Contempt Case
Despite the requests, the court showed reluctance to list the contempt matter on an urgent basis. Justice Kant remarked, “Let’s see if some saleable points are still left after a week,” indicating the bench’s preference to take up the matter after the initial public frenzy had subsided.
Incident and Immediate Aftermath
The incident took place on October 6 in the courtroom of the Chief Justice. In a shocking breach of security, 71-year-old advocate Rakesh Kishore hurled a shoe towards the CJI during proceedings. The CJI, however, remained calm and unfazed. He directed the court staff and security personnel to “just ignore” the act and let off the lawyer with a warning.
The Bar Council of India later suspended Kishore’s licence with immediate effect, terming the act unprecedented and unacceptable.
