Is the Attack on Chief Justice Gavai an Inexcusable Act?

Click to start listening
Is the Attack on Chief Justice Gavai an Inexcusable Act?

Synopsis

Union Minister Pralhad Joshi and Karnataka Home Minister G. Parameshwara condemned the recent shoe-throwing incident directed at Chief Justice B.R. Gavai. This unprecedented act raises serious questions about the state of judicial respect in India and highlights ongoing intolerance within society. The response from the judiciary and the public could set a crucial precedent.

Key Takeaways

  • Union Minister Pralhad Joshi condemns the attack on Chief Justice B.R. Gavai.
  • Karnataka Home Minister G. Parameshwara urges legal action against the advocate involved.
  • Justice Gavai's response showcases his resilience and commitment to the judiciary.
  • The incident reflects ongoing societal intolerance towards judicial authority.
  • Political leaders emphasize the need to uphold the dignity of the judiciary.

None

Bengaluru/New Delhi, Oct 6 (NationPress)

Union Minister for Food and Civil Supplies Pralhad Joshi has vehemently denounced the attack on the Chief Justice of India. Speaking from New Delhi on Monday, he remarked, “The assault on Supreme Court Chief Justice B.R. Gavai is unacceptable. Such an act is inexcusable in our society and under the Constitution. Despite facing this attack, Justice Gavai exhibited remarkable calm and harmony, which has further elevated the dignity of the judiciary.”

Karnataka Home Minister G. Parameshwara took to X to condemn the incident. “I strongly condemn the event where an advocate threw a shoe at the Honorable Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, B.R. Gavai. This act of throwing a shoe at a judge is a serious affront to our country’s judicial system and the Constitution,” he stated.

Justice B.R. Gavai, who comes from a marginalized community, has ascended through the ranks by achieving higher education and now occupies one of the most esteemed positions in the country. The religious extremists of the so-called Sanatana culture have revealed their malicious mindset within the confines of the Supreme Court, he noted.

Parameshwara emphasized, “Judges are the guardians of our nation’s democratic framework and Constitution. By throwing a shoe at a judge, the advocate has insulted the entire judicial system. I strongly call for strict legal action against the lawyer involved, to uphold the dignity of the judiciary.”

Minister for RDPR, IT and BT Priyank Kharge remarked, “Today, the advocates of 'Manuvad' have hurled a shoe at none other than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. This is not just an attack on an individual; it is an assault on justice itself and on the Constitution.”

There is no need to explicitly name those who foster such a Manuvad mentality. This is not merely a shoe attack, but a terroristic strike against the values of the Constitution by the fundamentalists of 'Manuvad', Kharge asserted.

This incident exemplifies the intolerance that 'Manuvadis' harbor against the Constitution, and the continued oppression of the marginalized, even when one of their own has reached the highest constitutional office in the country. Today, we have received undeniable proof of our fear that “the Constitution is in peril,” stated Priyank Kharge.

Isn’t today’s governance in this country aligned with the values of the Constitution? Or is it being directed by the 'Manusmriti' propagated by the RSS? Will the Central Government take responsibility for this incident? Kharge questioned.

Such an unprecedented act has now occurred in our nation’s history. This dark mark of the 'Manuvadis' can never be wiped clean, he concluded.

A dramatic scene unfolded at the Supreme Court on Monday when an elderly man attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai during a courtroom session. The shoe, however, fell short of the bench, and security personnel swiftly restrained the individual.

Unfazed by the disruption, Chief Justice Gavai addressed the court, stating, “I am the last person to be disturbed by such incidents,” before proceedings resumed as planned.

Witnesses reported that the incident transpired shortly after the first case of the day was taken up. The man, later identified as Kishore Rakesh through a proximity card generally issued to lawyers and clerks, reportedly shouted slogans such as, “India won’t tolerate Sanatan’s insult,” before attempting to throw the shoe. His motives remain unclear, and security agencies are currently interrogating him.

This dramatic event followed criticism aimed at Chief Justice B.R. Gavai over a comment he made last week during the hearing of a public interest plea concerning the reconstruction of a damaged idol of Lord Vishnu in Khajuraho. While dismissing the plea, Gavai had reportedly said, “Go and ask the deity himself to intervene,” a remark that ignited widespread outrage on social media.

In response to the controversy, Chief Justice Gavai clarified, “Someone informed me that my remarks were misrepresented on social media. I respect all religions.”

IANS

mka

Point of View

I believe that such acts of violence against our judiciary are a reflection of a deeper societal malaise. The judiciary must remain an independent and respected institution, and it is imperative that we collectively stand against any form of disrespect towards it. The dignity of justice must be upheld at all costs.
NationPress
07/10/2025

Frequently Asked Questions

What happened during the incident at the Supreme Court?
An elderly man attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice B.R. Gavai during a court session, which was condemned by various political leaders.
Who condemned the attack on Chief Justice Gavai?
Union Minister Pralhad Joshi and Karnataka Home Minister G. Parameshwara both condemned the incident, calling it intolerable.
What are the implications of this incident?
This incident raises serious concerns about the respect for the judiciary and the ongoing intolerance in society.
How did Chief Justice Gavai respond to the incident?
Chief Justice Gavai remained calm and stated that he is 'the last person to be affected by such things,' before continuing with court proceedings.
What does this incident reveal about societal attitudes?
It highlights a growing intolerance towards the judiciary and raises questions about the protection of democratic values in India.
Nation Press