The news: On October 6, 2025, a 71-year-old lawyer, Rakesh Kishore, hurled a shoe at Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai during a Supreme Court hearing, shouting “Sanatan dharma ka apmaan nahi sahega hindustan” (We will not tolerate insults to Sanatan Dharma). Following the incident, Kishore was detained by police but later released. Later, he was suspended by the Bar Council of India for his actions. Despite the suspension, Kishore showed no remorse, claiming he was guided by a “divine force”.
Source: Media, x.com
Analysis
Why did it happen?
As told by the lawyer Rakesh Kishore, he was guided by a divine force and felt that CJI had insulted the Sanatan Dharma through his remarks earlier. It therefore appears that he was blinded by his devotion to Sanatan Dharma and religion.
Another aspect is the caste of CJI, who is a Dalit and that of the lawyer, who is an upper caste Hindu. The reason may be the sense of superiority perceived by upper castes over lower castes. If it is so, it’s a shame that people still believe and follow this ideology based on caste system.
Another reason may be political motivation or monetary benefits received for the act, but there are no evidences for this claim.
What events may have directly led to this?
On September 18, 2025, the CJI dismissed a plea seeking directions to reconstruct and reinstall a seven-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari Temple, part of the UNESCO World Heritage Khajuraho temple complex in Madhya Pradesh. The CJI’s remarks were “This is purely publicity interest litigation… Go and ask the deity himself to do something. If you are saying you are a strong devotee of Lord Vishnu, then you pray and do some meditation.” These remarks may have instigated the response of shoe hurling on the CJI.
What could be the motivation for this act?
- Anger due to remarks of the CJI on Lord Vishnu.
- Devotion to Sanatan Dharma and religion
- Sense of impunity because of being upper caste.
- Fearlessness because of the old age of advocate Rakesh Kishore, and being close to end of his career.
- Fearlessness because of the perceived unconditional support of the government to the devotees of Sanatan Dharma.
- Instigation by peers, relatives or social media.
Critical questions
Should the lawyer who hurled shoe at the CJI be left free without a case or trial?
Though it is unlawful and punishable under law, what measures or actions are being taken to prevent such acts in the future?
Is this an attack on the judiciary and legal system ?
Potential impact and consequences
- No impact on the judicial system.
- Hurt sentiments and confidence of the CJI.
- Hurt sentiments of the lawyers and judges.
- Hurt confidence of the people in judiciary.
- The judiciary may fear making remarks in cases regarding religious matters.
- Motivation for more such acts in future.
Have similar events happened earlier in recent past?
Yes, on several occasions.
February 2025: A convict who was sentenced to life imprisonment hurled a slipper at a judge in a Rangareddy District Court.
January 2024: Advocate Nitin Atal allegedly hurled a shoe at the judge inside a courtroom in Madhya Pradesh’s Agar district.
May 2024: Unhappy over the dismissal of his civil suit, a 65-year-old petitioner, Mohammad Salim, allegedly threw a garland of shoes at a district judge in the courtroom in Indore.
February 2020: An undertrial suspected ISIS operative Md. Masiruddin alias Musa attacked a special court judge by throwing a shoe at him during a hearing at Bankshall court in central Kolkata.
April 2013: Karnail Singh Peer Mohammad, the president of All India Sikhs Students Federation, threw his shoe at District Judge J.R. Aryan after he acquitted Sajjan Kumar in a case related to the 1984 anti-Sikh riots case.
April 2012: Bavanidas Bavaji a resident of Bhayavadar, Rajkot threw both of his sandals at Justice K.S. Jhaveri. He was later convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison.
Significance
This event is significant at present because it presents an opportunity to place such safeguards and measures to prevent such acts in future. It also presents an opportunity to set it as an example showing how lethal such acts can be to the perpetrators. This significance will be lost in the long run.
Critic-lens 
Leave a comment