Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeOther LawsAG Grants Consent for Criminal Contempt Against Advocate Over Shoe-Throwing Incident in...

AG Grants Consent for Criminal Contempt Against Advocate Over Shoe-Throwing Incident in Supreme Court

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani has granted consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against advocate Rakesh Kishore, following his alleged misconduct by throwing shoe at CJI during proceedings before the Supreme Court of India. 

The consent was issued under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and addressed to Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Vikas Singh.

In a strongly worded letter, the Attorney General observed that the conduct of Mr. Kishore amounted to criminal contempt of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, falling squarely within the ambit of Section 2(c) of the Act. Venkataramani wrote that Kishore’s acts and utterances were “scandalous” and calculated to demean the majesty and authority of the Court.

“Such behaviour strikes at the very foundation of the justice delivery system and has the clear tendency to lower public confidence in the institution of the judiciary, and more so of the highest Court,” the Attorney General noted.

The incident reportedly involved an attempt by Mr. Kishore to throw a shoe during court proceedings, an act which the Attorney General described as a grave affront to the dignity of the Court and the rule of law. The AG stated unequivocally that “no person can have any reason whatsoever to scandalise the Court,” emphasizing that throwing or attempting to throw any object at judges or shouting in court constitutes unacceptable and contemptuous conduct.

Rejecting any justification offered by Mr. Kishore, Venkataramani remarked that the reasons advanced by him “can never be in justification of such scandalous conduct.” He further noted that the advocate had shown no remorse or repentance, as evidenced by his subsequent utterances.

“From the materials placed on record, I find Mr. Rakesh Kishore has not shown any repentance as regards the conduct in question,” the letter stated.

Accordingly, the Attorney General formally granted consent for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against Mr. Kishore before the Supreme Court.

The incident has stirred significant debate within the legal fraternity, with SCBA President Vikas Singh earlier asserting that such behaviour cannot go “unnoticed” and that the matter concerns institutional integrity. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had also expressed concurrence, underscoring that the prestige of the Supreme Court must be protected.

The Supreme Court is expected to take up the matter for hearing shortly. If found guilty, Mr. Kishore could face punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, which includes imprisonment up to six months or a fine up to ₹2,000, or both.

Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma
Amit Sharma is the Content Editor at JurisHour. He has been writing about the Indian legal market. He has covered tax & company litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and Various Tribunals. Amit graduated from MLSU Law College with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. from MLSU, Udaipur, Rajasthan. An Advocate in Taxation, and practised in Tribunals as well as Rajasthan High Court and pursued Masters in Constitutional Law. He started out small with little resources but a big plan to take tax legal education to the remotest locations across India and eventually to the world. His vision is to make tax related legal developments accessible to the masses.

Latest articles

GST Demand Summary Can’t Include Tax Already Adjusted Against Payments: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that a discrepancy between a detailed GST adjudication...

DFIA Exports Ineligible For RoDTEP Benefits; Customs Directs Repayment With Applicable Interest

The Office of the Commissioner of Customs, NS-II, at Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House (JNCH),...

DGGI Meerut | Cess Arrest Invalid Without Disclosure Of ‘Reasons To Believe’; Producing Them Before Magistrate Is Insufficient: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has quashed the arrest of two petitioners under the Health...

Rs. 80 Lakh GST ITC Case: Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Worker Allegedly Paid Rs. 20K A Month To Front Firm Run By Others

The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to a man accused in a case...

More like this

GST Demand Summary Can’t Include Tax Already Adjusted Against Payments: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that a discrepancy between a detailed GST adjudication...

DFIA Exports Ineligible For RoDTEP Benefits; Customs Directs Repayment With Applicable Interest

The Office of the Commissioner of Customs, NS-II, at Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House (JNCH),...

DGGI Meerut | Cess Arrest Invalid Without Disclosure Of ‘Reasons To Believe’; Producing Them Before Magistrate Is Insufficient: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has quashed the arrest of two petitioners under the Health...