In a shocking incident that unfolded in a Delhi courtroom on Monday, October 6, 2025, an Indian lawyer named Rakesh Kishore hurled a shoe at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, sparked by controversial remarks the judge allegedly made about a Hindu deity. The unprecedented act of defiance, which took place during a court proceeding, has sent ripples across India’s legal and political spheres, igniting debates about judicial conduct, religious sensitivities, and courtroom decorum. This incident, witnessed by multiple lawyers and reported widely, has drawn sharp reactions, including condemnation from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who described the act as “utterly condemnable.” Below is a detailed account of the event, its context, and its broader implications, as pieced together from eyewitness accounts and media reports.
The incident occurred in the Supreme Court of India, where Chief Justice BR Gavai was presiding over a case. According to three lawyers present in the courtroom who spoke to the BBC, Rakesh Kishore, a practicing advocate, launched his shoe toward the bench in a fit of anger. One lawyer recounted that the shoe “brushed against the Chief Justice and [another] justice... and fell behind them.” The act was not only a physical outburst but also a symbolic gesture of protest, as Mr. Kishore was heard shouting, “India won’t tolerate insult to Sanatan Dharma [Hinduism],” as security officials swiftly apprehended him and escorted him out of the courtroom. The dramatic scene unfolded in front of a stunned audience of legal professionals, marking a rare breach of decorum in India’s highest court.
Advocate Ravi Shanker Jha, who witnessed the incident, provided further details to the BBC, noting that Mr. Kishore “threw his shoe, and raised his hand to indicate that he had thrown the shoe.” Despite the disruption, Chief Justice Gavai displayed remarkable composure. Mr. Jha recounted that the Chief Justice instructed the lawyers in the courtroom to continue their arguments and not allow the incident to derail the proceedings. Another lawyer, Anas Tanwir, corroborated this, telling the BBC that Justice Gavai remained calm throughout the ordeal, maintaining the dignity of the court even in the face of such an extraordinary act of defiance.
The root of Mr. Kishore’s anger lies in remarks attributed to Chief Justice Gavai during a hearing on September 16, 2025, which sparked widespread controversy. The remarks were made in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking judicial intervention for the reconstruction of a 7-foot beheaded idol of Lord Vishnu, a revered deity in Hinduism, located in Khajuraho. According to reports, Justice Gavai dismissed the PIL, stating, “This is purely publicity interest litigation... Go and ask the deity himself to do something.” The comment, perceived by some as flippant and disrespectful, triggered a firestorm of criticism on social media, with accusations that the Chief Justice was mocking Hindu beliefs and Sanatan Dharma, the eternal way of life central to Hinduism.
The backlash was swift and intense, particularly among devout Hindus who viewed the remarks as an affront to their faith. Rakesh Kishore, the lawyer at the center of the shoe-throwing incident, emerged as a vocal critic of the Chief Justice. Speaking to The Print hours after the incident, Mr. Kishore expressed no remorse for his actions, claiming that they were divinely inspired. “I did not do it; God did. The Chief Justice of India mocked Sanatan Dharma. This was the Almighty’s order, a reaction to an action,” he said. He further revealed that he had been deeply disturbed since the Chief Justice’s remarks on September 16, stating, “I have not been able to sleep since 16 September.” Mr. Kishore accused Justice Gavai of not only dismissing the PIL but also making fun of Lord Vishnu, a charge that intensified the controversy surrounding the judge’s comments.
In response to the criticism, Chief Justice Gavai sought to clarify his stance, emphasizing his respect for all religions. According to the Press Trust of India, he stated that he holds reverence for all faiths, attempting to defuse the accusations of insensitivity. However, his remarks did little to quell the anger of those who felt that his original comment was inappropriate for a figure of his stature. The incident has highlighted the delicate balance between judicial impartiality and the deeply held religious sentiments of India’s diverse population.
Following the shoe-throwing incident, Mr. Kishore faced immediate consequences. He was suspended from practicing law, a decision that reflects the gravity of his actions in violating courtroom decorum and attacking the judiciary. Surprisingly, Indian authorities announced that no criminal charges would be filed against him, a decision that has raised questions about the handling of such acts of defiance. While some view the lack of charges as an attempt to de-escalate tensions, others argue that it may set a dangerous precedent for future disruptions in judicial proceedings.
The incident has also drawn significant political attention. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a prominent figure known for his advocacy of Hindu cultural values, condemned the shoe-throwing act as “utterly condemnable.” His statement underscores the government’s stance against such acts of aggression, particularly in a setting as sacrosanct as the Supreme Court. However, the broader controversy surrounding Chief Justice Gavai’s remarks has fueled discussions about the intersection of religion, law, and public discourse in India, a nation where religious sensitivities often play a significant role in shaping public opinion.
This incident is not an isolated one in the context of India’s complex socio-religious landscape. The judiciary, often tasked with adjudicating cases involving religious matters, has occasionally found itself at the center of controversies. Chief Justice Gavai’s comments, while perhaps intended as a dismissal of what he perceived as a frivolous PIL, have been interpreted by some as emblematic of a broader disconnect between the judiciary and the religious sentiments of the populace. The shoe-throwing incident, while extreme, reflects the intensity of emotions that religious issues can evoke in India, particularly when they involve revered figures like Lord Vishnu.
The broader implications of this incident extend beyond the courtroom. It raises questions about the boundaries of free speech, judicial conduct, and the right to protest. While Mr. Kishore’s actions were widely condemned, they have also garnered support from certain quarters who view him as a defender of Hindu faith against perceived slights. This polarization underscores the challenges faced by India’s judiciary in navigating cases that touch on religious sensitivities, particularly in a country where religion is deeply intertwined with identity and culture.
The incident also highlights the role of social media in amplifying controversies. The backlash against Chief Justice Gavai’s remarks gained momentum online, with hashtags and campaigns calling for accountability. This digital outrage likely played a role in emboldening Mr. Kishore’s actions, illustrating how social media can escalate tensions and transform localized incidents into national debates. The judiciary, traditionally insulated from public opinion, now faces increased scrutiny in the age of instant communication and viral campaigns.
Moving forward, this incident may prompt a reevaluation of courtroom security and protocols to prevent similar outbursts. The Supreme Court, as the highest judicial authority in India, is a symbol of justice and order, and any act that undermines its sanctity is likely to be met with swift repercussions. At the same time, the controversy surrounding Chief Justice Gavai’s remarks may lead to greater sensitivity among judges when addressing cases involving religious matters, as their words carry significant weight in shaping public perception.
In conclusion, the shoe-throwing incident in Delhi’s Supreme Court on October 6, 2025, represents a convergence of religious fervor, judicial authority, and public sentiment. Rakesh Kishore’s act, while condemned as an attack on the judiciary, was rooted in his belief that Chief Justice BR Gavai had insulted Sanatan Dharma through his remarks about Lord Vishnu. The incident, coupled with the Chief Justice’s composure and the subsequent decision not to press charges, reflects the complexities of navigating religious sensitivities in India’s legal system. As the nation grapples with the fallout, the incident serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between upholding judicial independence and respecting the deeply held beliefs of millions. Whether this event will lead to lasting changes in judicial conduct or courtroom security remains to be seen, but it has undoubtedly left an indelible mark on India’s legal and cultural landscape.
