“If he has come out of Hinduism after embracing Buddhism, how is he still a Dalit?” The lawyer who threw a shoe at the CJI revealed what offended him.
Advocate Rakesh Kishore said, “The CJI should think that he is sitting on such a high constitutional post, all the senior lawyers address him as ‘My Lord’, so he should also understand the meaning of ‘My Lord’ and maintain its dignity.”
Published on: 07 Oct 2025, 12:34 pm
New Delhi: Rakesh Kishore, the 71-year-old lawyer who attempted to throw a shoe at Chief Justice (CJI) Justice BR Gavai in the Supreme Court, is not ashamed of his action but has defended his action saying that he was hurt by the comments made by the CJI during the hearing of a religious case.
This dramatic incident occurred on Monday during the admission of cases before a bench headed by the Chief Justice of India. Advocate Rakesh Kishore suddenly stood up, moved towards the podium, threw his shoe, and attempted to throw it at the judge. According to eyewitnesses, before attacking, the lawyer loudly shouted, “India will not tolerate the insult of Sanatan Dharma.” However, security personnel immediately intervened and foiled his attempt. Following this incident, the Bar Council of India suspended Rakesh Kishore’s license to practice law with immediate effect.
A day after the incident, Rakesh Kishore spoke to news agency ANI and explained his side of the story. According to a report published in HT, he said, “The CJI should think that he holds such a high constitutional position and all senior lawyers address him as ‘My Lord’, so he should also understand the meaning of ‘My Lord’ and maintain its dignity.” Angered by the CJI’s recent comment on the Vishnu idol, lawyer Rakesh Kishore said, “If you cannot give alms to someone, then at least do not break his utensils…” Justifying his action, Kishore claimed that it was a reaction to what he considered a “mocking” of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed on September 16.
He said, “I was deeply hurt. On September 16, a man had filed a PIL in the CJI’s court. Justice Gavai completely ridiculed him. Ridiculous in the sense that he said, ‘Go pray to the idol, ask the idol to join its head itself’.”
Kishore said, ” On top of that, you go to Mauritius and say that the country will not be run by bulldozers. I ask the CJI and those opposing me: Is the bulldozer action by Yogi Adityanath ji against those occupying government land wrong? I am hurt and will remain hurt.”
Kishore alleged that the judiciary acts differently in cases involving other communities. Citing cases like Jallikattu and Dahi Handi, he said that when matters related to Sanatan Dharma come up, the Supreme Court consistently passes one order or another, which saddens him.
The lawyer said his actions were not done under the influence of alcohol or impulse, but rather in “emotional distress.” He said, “It wasn’t like I was drunk, or I took a pill, and then I went and did something. Nothing like that happened. He took action. It was my reaction.” He also said that he neither fears nor regrets what happened.
Kishore said, “Although I am strongly against violence, you should also consider why a non-violent, simple, honest person, against whom there is no case till date and who does not belong to any group, had to do all this? This is definitely a matter worth thinking about. The entire country should think about this.”
Rakesh Kishore also questioned the CJI’s Dalit identity. He said , “My name is Rakesh Kishore. Can anyone tell me my caste? Maybe I am a Dalit too. It is one-sided that you are taking advantage of the fact that he (CJI Gavai) is a Dalit. He is not a Dalit. He was earlier a Sanatani Hindu. He renounced his religion and converted to Buddhism. If he thinks that after converting to Buddhism he has come out of Hinduism, then how is he still a Dalit? It is about mentality.”
What did the CJI say in Mauritius?
CJI Justice Gavai delivered a lecture in Mauritius this month on the topic “Rule of Law in the Largest Democracy.” In it, he said that India’s legal system is governed by the “rule of law,” not the “rule of the bulldozer.” The CJI cited a November 2014 judgment condemning “bulldozer justice,” stating that such actions bypass due process, violate the rule of law, and infringe the fundamental right to shelter under Article 21.
