Shoe-Throwing Contempt Case: In a stern warning to the perils of unchecked digital discourse, the Supreme Court on Thursday flagged the dangers of “unregulated” social media, even as it greenlit contempt proceedings against the advocate accused of hurling a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta confirmed his consent for the action, while the court signalled it may revisit the high-profile case after Diwali, urging restraint amid the online frenzy.
The incident, a brazen security lapse on October 6, saw 72-year-old lawyer Rakesh Kishore attempt to fling a shoe towards CJI Gavai right in the courtroom. Remarkably, the CJI stayed composed, directing court officials and security to “just ignore” the act and let the offender off with a mere warning. The Bar Council of India wasted no time, suspending Kishore’s licence with immediate effect, underscoring the gravity of assaulting judicial dignity.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard urgent pleas from Mehta and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Vikas Singh, senior advocate, for contempt charges against Kishore. Singh painted a grim picture of social media’s fallout, lamenting how it had gone “berserk” since the event, spawning a torrent of demeaning comments that eroded institutional integrity. Both urged a restraining order to stem the tide of online vitriol.
The bench, however, drew a firm line on free speech. “The fundamental right of speech and expression is not absolute and cannot be at the cost of the integrity and dignity of others,” it observed, spotlighting the double-edged sword of platforms where “we are both product and consumer” of toxic content. The judges highlighted the “ill-effects” of social media’s unregulated sprawl, but showed reluctance to expedite the contempt hearing. “Let’s see if some saleable points are still left after a week,” they remarked, hinting at a post-Diwali review.
This episode lays bare the simmering tensions between judicial sanctity and the wild west of digital expression. As contempt proceedings loom, the Supreme Court’s caution serves as a clarion call: liberty ends where respect for institutions begins, and platforms must rein in the chaos they amplify. With Mehta’s nod paving the way, justice’s wheels are turning—slowly, but surely.
