Attorney General’s Approval Sought for Contempt Action Against Advocate Rakesh Kishore

In a startling incident that has raised serious concerns about courtroom decorum and security, advocate Rakesh Kishore attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai during a court session on Monday. This act of aggression has prompted another lawyer, Subhash Chandran K.R., to seek the consent of Attorney General R. Venkataramani to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Kishore.

The Incident: A Breach of Courtroom Conduct

The courtroom incident unfolded dramatically when Kishore, visibly agitated, hurled a shoe towards the CJI while shouting, “Sanatan ka apman nahi sahenge,” which translates to “We will not tolerate the insult to Sanatan.” This outburst not only shocked those present but also raised alarms about the safety and integrity of judicial proceedings in India.

The Bar Council of India responded swiftly, suspending Kishore’s bar license with immediate effect. Such a decisive action underscores the seriousness of the breach and the need to uphold the dignity of the legal profession.

Legal Framework for Contempt Proceedings

In a letter addressed to the Attorney General, advocate Subhash Chandran K.R. invoked Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. This provision allows for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings either by the Supreme Court or High Courts when they are personally aware of the contemptuous act. For actions in the Supreme Court, the consent of the Attorney General and the Solicitor General is required, while High Courts can proceed with the consent of the Advocate General.

Chandran’s plea emphasized that Kishore’s actions constituted a “gross interference with the administration of justice” and represented a “deliberate attempt to undermine the dignity of the Supreme Court.” The letter articulated that such contemptuous behavior diminishes the authority of the judiciary and undermines the Constitution of India.

A Pattern of Disrespect

The letter further noted that Kishore continued to make disparaging remarks against the Chief Justice in media interactions following the incident, showing no remorse for his actions. This behavior raises questions about the intent behind his actions and whether they reflect a broader trend of disrespect towards judicial authority.

Kishore’s actions are not isolated; they echo a troubling pattern of public figures challenging the judiciary’s authority. The judiciary, as the guardian of the Constitution, plays a crucial role in maintaining the rule of law. Any attempt to undermine this authority can have far-reaching implications for public confidence in the legal system.

Historical Context: The Significance of Courtroom Decorum

Courtroom decorum has long been a cornerstone of judicial proceedings. Historically, acts of disrespect towards judges have been met with severe consequences. For instance, in the United States, the act of throwing objects at judges has led to immediate contempt charges and even jail time. Such measures are designed to protect the integrity of the judicial process and ensure that justice is administered without fear or favor.

In India, the judiciary has faced its share of challenges, particularly in recent years, as public discourse around legal matters has become increasingly polarized. The rise of social media has amplified voices that challenge judicial decisions, sometimes leading to confrontational behavior in courtrooms. This incident involving Kishore serves as a stark reminder of the need for maintaining respect for judicial authority.

Broader Implications for the Legal Community

The incident has sparked discussions within the legal community about the importance of upholding the dignity of the profession. The Bar Council of India’s swift action to suspend Kishore’s license reflects a commitment to maintaining high standards of conduct among legal practitioners. It also serves as a warning to others who may consider similar actions in the future.

Moreover, the call for contempt proceedings highlights the role of the Attorney General in safeguarding the judiciary’s integrity. The Attorney General’s approval is not merely a procedural step; it represents a collective responsibility to uphold the rule of law and ensure that the judiciary remains a respected institution.

The Role of Public Figures in Shaping Judicial Perception

Kishore’s actions also raise questions about the influence of public figures on public perception of the judiciary. In an era where social media can amplify dissenting voices, the responsibility of advocates and public figures to maintain respect for judicial institutions is paramount. Their actions can either bolster or undermine public confidence in the legal system.

Earlier, Kishore had also sought to initiate contempt proceedings against religious orator Aniruddhacharya and YouTuber Ajeet Bharati for allegedly inciting the attempted attack on the CJI. This move indicates a complex interplay of legal and social dynamics, where public figures are increasingly embroiled in controversies that challenge the judiciary’s authority.

Conclusion: Upholding Judicial Integrity

The attempt to hurl a shoe at the Chief Justice of India is not just an isolated incident; it is a reflection of broader societal tensions regarding respect for judicial authority. As the legal community grapples with the implications of this event, it is crucial to reaffirm the importance of courtroom decorum and the rule of law. The Attorney General’s decision on whether to proceed with contempt charges against Rakesh Kishore will be closely watched, as it may set a precedent for how similar incidents are handled in the future.

In a democratic society, the judiciary must remain a pillar of stability and justice. Upholding its dignity is not just the responsibility of legal practitioners but of society as a whole. As this situation unfolds, it serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between free expression and respect for the institutions that uphold our rights and freedoms.