Delhi HC condemns shoe-hurling attempt at CJI Gavai, terms act an affront to judiciary’s majesty

NEw new new delhi: The Delhi heights margaret court on midweek strongly condemned the incident involving an advocate’s attempt to hurl a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai, saying that such acts tend to penetrate the court’s majesty and therefore need to be unequivocally deprecated.“It tends to penetrate the majesty of the court…. We share your (petitioner’s) concerns. It has not hurt members of the bar but the bench as well. It is not about an individual, but the institutions. If such an incident is happening in the society, (it) needs not only (to) be deprecated but certain appropriate measures need to be taken,” a bench of chief justice D.K. Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela said.The court made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate Tejasvi Mohan seeking directions to the Union ministry of information and broadcasting to remove videos uploaded on social media platforms in the aftermath of the incident.During the hearing, additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Centre, submitted that while the petition was maintainable before the Delhi high court, it should appropriately be heard by the Supreme Court. He pointed out that a bench led by justice Surya Kant was already hearing a plea filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) seeking contempt proceedings against 71-year-old advocate Rakesh Kishore.Sharma added that though the Supreme Court had shown reluctance to initiate contempt proceedings, it had asked SCBA president Vikas Singh and solicitor general Tushar Mehta to suggest broader institutional safeguards instead of punitive action.Taking note of the submissions, the court observed that although it had no objection to issuing directions, it would be more appropriate for the petitioner to intervene in the ongoing Supreme Court proceedings.The court said it would pass directions if the apex court declined permission for such intervention, following which Mohan agreed to approach the Supreme Court.Also Read: Shoe thrown at CJI: the dangers of fanning polarisation“Additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma has brought to our notice proceedings of contempt petition instituted by the Supreme Court Bar Association before the Supreme Court on the basis of the report. It has also been stated by the ASG that it appears that the proceedings pending before the Supreme Court may not be confined to issues relating to contempt, rather its width may be extended. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that in view of the aforesaid, the petitioner will seek its intervention in the proceedings before the Supreme Court,” the court said in the order.The matter will be next heard on December 4.The incident took place on October 6 when Kishore, an advocate who has since been suspended, suddenly approached the dais during court proceedings before the CJI’s bench and attempted to remove his shoe before being restrained by security personnel. As he was escorted out, he was heard shouting, “Sanatan ka apmaan nahi sahenge (We will not tolerate any insult to Sanatan).”Unfazed, CJI Gavai had calmly resumed proceedings, telling lawyers, “Don’t get distracted by all this. These things do not affect me.” He later told the court, “For us, it is a forgotten chapter,” and refused to press any charges against Kishore, asking officials to “just ignore” the episode.Also Read: Let it die a natural death: SC on CJI shoe-hurling episodeHowever, several members of the Bar had called the act an affront to the dignity of the institution. On October 8, a Supreme Court lawyer had written to the attorney general seeking consent to initiate contempt proceedings, calling the act one that “diminishes the majesty and authority of the Supreme Court.” The Bar Council of India subsequently suspended Kishore’s licence, while the SCBA revoked his temporary membership and access to court premises.On October 9, CJI Gavai, responding publicly for the first time to the incident, told the court that he did not wish to take the matter further and had “forgotten about it.” Hearing a separate case with justices Ujjal Bhuyan and K Vinod Chandran, the CJI said he and his brother judge were “very shocked” by what happened but regarded it as “a forgotten chapter.” Justice Bhuyan, however, struck a different note, observing that the incident should not be brushed aside since it was “an affront to the institution of the judiciary with the CJI at the helm,” and that “the institution of CJI is not a joke.”