AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi criticized the muted response to the Supreme Court shoe-hurling incident, calling it “an insult to the Supreme Court” and highlighting rising crimes against Dalits. He questioned how a 70-year-old man could be radicalised, raising concerns over social and legal accountability.
New Delhi: The recent attempt to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R. Gavai in the Supreme Court has sparked widespread discussions across the country.
All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi condemned the incident, calling it “an insult to the Supreme Court,” and stated that he “respectfully disagrees” with CJI Gavai’s decision not to pursue the matter further.
In an interview with ANI, Owaisi criticized the explanation given for the attacker’s behavior. He said the 70-year-old man who threw the shoe appeared to have been “radicalised.”
Owaisi emphasized,
“The entire Supreme Court has been insulted. A shoe was thrown. I respectfully disagree with Mr. Gavai, who said I don’t want to book the case. The question is not about him. The question is about Dalits being beaten… NCRB 2023 data has just come. Every day, 12 Dalit women are raped. Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of crimes against Dalits. Two boys jumped into Parliament, and we imposed UAPA on them. Now this gentleman is 70 years old. The argument for radicalisation is that young people get radicalised. Tell me, how a 70-year-old man became radicalised?”
Owaisi also referred to historical incidents, pointing out,
“No person was convicted for the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992. Not a single person was convicted. I felt pain. Such a huge mob, not a single person was convicted. We said the judgment is wrong. The judgment came on triple talaq. We said it was a wrong decision. Where have we attacked a judge over religion? He threw a shoe today, and tomorrow he’ll do something else. The wrong message that went across the country was that someone threw a shoe in the Chief Justice of India’s court and shouted such nonsense, and the government gave a muted response, a completely cold response… What is the Delhi Police doing? If his name wasn’t Kishore, but Asad, what would they have done by now?… This is casteism, this is communism… So this messaging that’s going out is going very wrong… He has been made a hero on social media.”
CJI Bhushan R. Gavai responded to the incident on Thursday, saying that he and his brother, Justice K. Vinod Chandran, were “shocked” by the shoe-hurling attempt carried out by 71-year-old lawyer Rajesh Kishore on Monday.
He further stated that the matter is now considered a “forgotten chapter” for the Supreme Court. The comments were made while the CJI’s bench was hearing an unrelated matter, in which Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayan had appeared.
Justice Ujjwal Bhuyan, CJI Gavai’s brother, also condemned the act, highlighting the seriousness of the situation. He stressed that it is not a joke and described the act as “an affront to the institution.”
The Solicitor General of India (SGI), Tushar Mehta, present in the Court during the proceedings, supported this view, calling the attack “unpardonable” and praising CJI Gavai for showing magnanimity by pardoning the attacker.
The incident occurred on October 6 when Advocate Rakesh Kishore attempted to hurl a shoe at CJI Gavai inside the courtroom.
Security personnel promptly intervened and escorted him out. While being taken out, Kishore reportedly shouted,
“Sanatan ka apmaan nahi sahega Hindustan.”
Following the incident, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) took strict action against Kishore. The association terminated his temporary membership, revoked his entry card, and barred him from entering Supreme Court premises.
In a statement, the SCBA said,
“Such reprehensible, disorderly, and intemperate behaviour is utterly unbecoming of an officer of the court and constitutes a serious breach of professional ethics, decorum, and the dignity of the Supreme Court.”
The association further described Kishore’s actions as
“a direct assault on judicial independence” and “a serious breach of professional ethics and decorum.”
The shoe-hurling attempt has ignited debates over courtroom security, judicial independence, and social media’s role in amplifying such incidents. Legal experts warn that acts like these, regardless of the perpetrator’s age, threaten the sanctity of the judiciary and may encourage similar attacks if left unaddressed.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI BR Gavai
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
