When the Gavel Trembled: Shoe, silence and spectacle of justice

Advocate Rakesh Kishore’s dramatic gesture did not merely disrupt proceedings; it ripped open old wounds, spotlighting the unease wrought by a judiciary increasingly accused of marching in lockstep with the ambitions of power, rather than standing guard over liberty.

Like a thunderbolt crashing through the vaulted solemnity of the nation’s highest court, a single shoe arced toward Chief Justice BR Gavai—scarlet in its defiance, heavy with symbolism, and laden with the unrest brewing in India’s democracy.

The Supreme Court—a temple of justice once held sacrosanct—became, in an instant, a battlefield for ruptured faith, its silence on the oppressed now echoing louder than the shout of any protester.

Advocate Rakesh Kishore’s dramatic gesture did not merely disrupt proceedings; it ripped open old wounds, spotlighting the unease wrought by a judiciary increasingly accused of marching in lockstep with the ambitions of power, rather than standing guard over liberty.

The Incident and Its Fallout

Kishore’s act, executed in open court, was not just a breakdown of decorum; it was an attack on judicial independence. Even as Chief Justice Gavai maintained composure and urged legal deliberations to continue, the wider implications reverberated across the judiciary and public consciousness.

The Bar Council of India promptly suspended Kishore, while segments of the right-wing commentariat, including influencer Ajeet Bharti, poured fuel over the smouldering spectacle with taunts and caste-coded jibes, further polarizing public discourse.

Notably, no criminal proceedings have followed—an unsettling precedent.

Centre-Centric Triumphs: A Quiet Slide

The Supreme Court’s recent high-octane verdicts have, more often than not, mapped directly onto the aspirations of the executive. Consider the Ayodhya (Ram Mandir) verdict: the court awarded the entire 2.77-acre disputed land to the deity Ram Lalla, directing the government to build the Ram Mandir and provide Muslims with alternative land for a mosque.

In the historic triple talaq case, a five-member multi-faith bench declared instant triple talaq unconstitutional, again in step with the government’s legislative goals.

These rulings, while celebrated by the centre and its supporters, have drawn scrutiny for the increasingly unambiguous tilt.

Judicial Silence: The Cost of Incarcerated Voices

Yet, when it comes to cases involving the disempowered and dissenting—activists and intellectuals swept up in the Bhima Koregaon case or the tragic incarceration and death of Father Stan Swamy—the Supreme Court has remained conspicuously silent.

Among those still languishing behind bars without trial are celebrated figures such as Sudha Bharadwaj (trade unionist and lawyer), Anand Teltumbde (scholar), Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira (writers and civil rights activists), Gautam Navlakha (journalist), and Hany Babu (academic), all known for defending the marginalized and upholding civil liberties.

Also Read: CJI BR Gavai faces backlash over remarks during Lord Vishnu idol hearing

The failure to intervene decisively in these cases continues to erode faith among citizens who look to the apex court for justice beyond the state’s interests.

Select Outrage and the Double Standard

It is telling that while right-wing X (formerly Twitter) handles erupted in defence—if not open endorsement—of the Supreme Court shoe attack, no such mass outrage from the left ever materialized over the Supreme Court’s inaction on the Bhima Koregaon incarcerations or the bulldozing of dissent. The reality is that collective outrage now follows the winds of majoritarian sentiment, not constitutional rectitude.

Bulldozer Law: Contempt in Plain Sight

The so-called “bulldozer justice,” a euphemism for extra-legal house demolitions routinely occurring in BJP-ruled states, continues unabated despite explicit Supreme Court orders for a pan-India halt pending new guidelines. Yet, contempt for the court’s authority is met with mere warnings instead of decisive, punitive actions, undermining the court’s credibility and emboldening political actors to defy its writ.

The Road Ahead: Restore Judicial Majesty

If the Supreme Court—and the CJI in particular—responds to this public scandal with mere stoicism or silence, the damage to India’s judicial dignity will be incalculable. When the highest legs of justice appear more susceptible to the ambitions of power than the cries of the oppressed, and when their own sanctity is attacked and left unavenged, the message is grim: faith in the institution is fading.

The moment demands not magnanimity, but clarity and firmness—a demonstration that the judiciary’s integrity is immune to both populist aggression and political capture. The Supreme Court must, unequivocally, get its act straight. Restore balance, enforce the rule of law in spirit, and let every shoe hurled at its sanctity be answered not with quietude, but with the iron voice of justice.

(The author is a Kolkata-based Political Observer)