Today, On 6th September, The Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCOARA) condemned an advocate’s act against the Chief Justice of India, calling it an “unwarranted and intemperate gesture.” SCOARA urged the Supreme Court to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings, affirming full support for the judiciary.
The Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCOARA) issued a resolution denouncing the “unwarranted and intemperate gesture” of an advocate who allegedly showed disrespect toward the Chief Justice of India and the accompanying judges.
They characterized this behavior as “unbecoming of a member of the Bar” and an “assault on judicial independence.”
SCOARA has called on the Supreme Court to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings and has expressed its unwavering support for the judiciary.
In its resolution dated October 6, 2025, SCOARA emphasized that such conduct goes against the dignity of the legal profession and the constitutional values of decorum, discipline, and institutional integrity.
The association further noted that any act aimed at maligning or personally targeting a sitting judge of the Supreme Court “constitutes a direct assault on the independence of the judiciary and undermines public faith in the justice delivery system.”
SCOARA expressed complete solidarity with the Chief Justice of India and the judiciary, reiterating its commitment to preserving the independence, impartiality, and majesty of the Supreme Court.
The association called upon all members of the legal fraternity to maintain professional decorum, avoid divisive behavior, and protect the unity and dignity of the institution.
The association also recommended that the Supreme Court may consider taking suo motu cognizance of the incident and initiate appropriate proceedings for contempt of court.
SCOARA stated,
“Such a course would serve as a necessary reminder that freedom of speech, while sacrosanct, carries with it a duty of restraint, particularly for members of the legal profession who are officers of the Court.”
The resolution, signed by SCOARA Honorary Secretary Nikhil Jain, reflects the association’s firm stance on upholding the ethical standards of the Bar and defending the authority of the judiciary in India.
Earlier, Today, A lawyer attempted to assault Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai during a Supreme Court session on Monday.
The incident occurred as the CJI presided over the hearing of case mentions by various lawyers. Sources indicate that the lawyer approached the dais and tried to remove his shoe to throw it at the judge.
Fortunately, security personnel intervened just in time and escorted the individual out of the courtroom.
As he left, the lawyer was heard stating,
“Sanatan ka apman nahi sahenge.”
Unfazed by the disruption, the CJI urged the lawyers present to continue their arguments, asserting,
“Don’t get distracted by all this. We are not distracted. These things do not affect me.”
The incident may have been triggered by CJI Gavai’s remarks in an earlier case concerning the restoration of a 7-foot beheaded Lord Vishnu idol at Khajuraho.
Earlier, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition seeking to replace a damaged, 7-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.
The petitioner argued that restoring the idol, which was decapitated during Mughal invasions centuries ago, was vital for reviving the temple’s sanctity and resuming worship.
The temple, constructed by the Chandela rulers between 1050 and 1075 AD, is part of the Khajuraho complex, renowned for its remarkable architecture and recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Devotees have long claimed that the broken idol has hindered prayers at the sanctum sanctorum.
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, who led the bench, dismissed the plea sharply.
He remarked to petitioner Rakesh Dalal, who has been advocating for the restoration of broken idols across various temples,
“This is purely publicity interest litigation, Go and ask the deity itself to do something now. You say you are a staunch devotee of Lord Vishnu. So go and pray now.”
This comment, delivered in open court, was meant to be sarcastic but quickly resonated outside the courtroom. For Dalal and his supporters, the ruling represented not only a legal setback but also a blow to their religious sentiments.
Posts advocating for “Impeach the CJI” gained significant traction, revealing a stark divide between constitutional restraint and public sentiment.
This controversy highlights a profound tension between religious devotion and secular constitutional law.
Read Attachment
