Lawyer Tries to Hurl Shoe at Chief Justice BR Gavai in Supreme Court; Prompt Security Action Averts Incident.
New Delhi:
A dramatic and deeply concerning incident unfolded inside the Supreme Court of India on Monday, when a lawyer allegedly attempted to hurl a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice BR Gavai during court proceedings. The incident took place in open court during the morning mentioning session, when lawyers submit urgent matters before the Bench.
According to eyewitnesses, the courtroom was functioning normally when the lawyer in question approached the dais. Without warning, he removed his shoe and attempted to throw it towards the Chief Justice. However, alert security personnel intervened immediately, preventing the attack and quickly restraining the individual.
The lawyer was reportedly shouting slogans related to religious sentiments, specifically, ‘Sanatan ka apman nahi sahenge’ (We will not tolerate the insult of Sanatan Dharma), as he was being escorted out of the courtroom. His exact grievance or reason behind the attempted outburst remains under investigation.
Despite the sudden disruption, Chief Justice BR Gavai remained calm and composed. Addressing the advocates present in the courtroom, he said “Don’t get distracted by all this. We are not distracted. These things do not affect me.”
Proceedings resumed shortly thereafter, with the Bench continuing to hear mentions without further disruption. The incident has raised serious concerns about courtroom security and access protocols, particularly in the highest court of the land.
The Supreme Court’s internal security unit has initiated a formal inquiry into the incident. While the name of the lawyer has not yet been officially released, preliminary reports suggest that he may have harbored personal or ideological grievances, possibly linked to recent discussions or court observations involving religious matters.
Senior members of the legal fraternity have strongly condemned the act, calling it a direct affront to the dignity of the judiciary.
“Such behavior inside the apex court is intolerable. The judiciary must be protected from all forms of intimidation or theatrics,” said a senior advocate present during the hearing.
As of now, no official FIR has been confirmed, but legal experts expect disciplinary and possibly criminal action against the lawyer for contempt of court and attempted assault.
The incident underscores the need for a review of security protocols within the Supreme Court premises and has triggered debate about the rising tensions between free expression, legal protest, and courtroom discipline.
