Throwing Objects & Shouting At Judges Is Scandalous, Says Attorney General Sanctioning Contempt Action Against Lawyer
Advocate Rakesh Kishore who attempted to throw a shoe at the Chief Justice of India
Attorney General for India, R. Venkataramani, today granted permission for the initiation of the Contempt of Court proceedings against Advocate Rakesh Kishore, who attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice of India BR Gavai on October 6.
AG, in his letter granting consent to Senior Advocate Vikas Singh to file criminal contempt petition against Kishore, said that throwing or attempting to throw any object aimed at the judges, or shouting at judges to find fault with the conduct of proceedings, will be scandalous.
"No person can have any reason whatsoever to scandalise the Court. Throwing or attempting to throw any object aimed at the Hon'ble Judges, or shouting at judges to find fault with the conduct of proceedings will be scandalous. The reason said to have been given by Mr. Rakesh Kishore, can never be in justification of such scandalous conduct. Such acts constitute a grave affront to the dignity of the Court and to the rule of law itself. From the materials placed on record, I find Mr. Rakesh Kishore, has not shown any repentance as regards the conduct in question as is evident from his subsequent utterances."
AG said that the acts of Kishore are not only scandalous but also calculated to demean the majesty and the authority of the Supreme Court. Such behaviour strikes at the very foundation of the justice delivery system, and has a clear tendency to lower public confidence in the institution of the judiciary, and more so of the highest Court.
The permission for the initiation of contempt proceedings was sought by Senior Advocate and President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Vikas Singh. The contempt has been initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
After AG's consent, Singh mentioned the matter before Justice Surya Kant seeking urgent listing. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta also supported contempt action. The Court, while agreeing to list the matter after Diwali vacations, asked if the issue should be revived again for social media discussions, given that the Chief Justice of India himself has declined to pursue further legal action against the offender.