Former CJI BR Gavai on his reaction to shoe-throwing incident: 'Maybe it is a result of my upbringing'

Former CJI BR Gavai

Former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai shared his reaction on the October 6 courtroom incident in which advocate Rakesh Kishore attempted to throw a shoe at him, saying his immediate decision not to initiate action was shaped by his background and values.

In a conversation with ANI, he noted, “Maybe it is a result of my upbringing… I didn’t even know it was related to some alleged utterances or observations made by me in court. But I felt I must proceed with the matter, and that was a decision taken in the spur of the moment.”

Kishore, who shouted “Sanatan ka apmaan nahi sahega Hindustan’’ while being removed by security, was escorted out after the attempted assault.

Shifting to broader issues within the judiciary, Justice Gavai pushed back against long-standing criticism of the Supreme Court collegium.

He insisted that claims of opacity were misplaced, stating, “Collegium is transparent. The allegations that it is opaque are not well-founded.” According to him, the current practice -- followed since the tenure of Justice Khanna -- requires collegium members to interact directly with shortlisted candidates and gather inputs from consulting judges, the executive, chief ministers, governors, and the Law Ministry before any final recommendation.

#WATCH | In an interview with ANI, Former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai spoke about the shoe throwing Incident on cam for the first time ever. The Ex-CJI further spoke about Bulldozer justice, Collegium transparency, political pressure in an explosive interview with ANI… pic.twitter.com/XNFFWeDGRX

Related stories

• 
  Supreme Court orders audit of private and deemed universities after Amity student alleges harassment...
• 
  Why accident insurance cover only for those purchasing tickets online, SC asks railways
• 
  OPINION | The perennial debate over the role of a governor

— ANI (@ANI) November 27, 2025

He also spoke about increasing attacks on constitutional bodies and courts, calling such remarks “wrong” and highlighting that judicial decisions rest solely on legal principles and the factual matrix of each case.

“Fair criticism of judgments is always welcome,” he said, adding that personal criticism of judges “is not in good taste.”

Commenting briefly on the controversy involving Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, Gavai described it as an "unfortunate incident" that had affected the judiciary’s public standing.

Cash was found after a fire at Justice Varma’s residence, leading to his transfer to the Allahabad High Court and the initiation of impeachment proceedings.

Gavai declined detailed remarks, noting that “the inquiry, headed by a sitting judge of this court, is ongoing” and that the matter now rests with Parliament.

Addressing perceptions that prominent matters receive preferential hearing, he underlined the structural burden facing the courts. India’s population-to-judge ratio, he said, remains among the lowest globally. While matters of national significance may sometimes be expedited, he clarified, “it doesn’t mean we give priority to high-profile cases.”

He also spoke on judicial activism, stressing upon access to justice for those hindered by socio-economic barriers. He said, “Allowing others to approach the court on their behalf helps fulfil our promise of economic and social justice.” Still, he warned that activism must remain within boundaries, saying, “judicial activism should not turn into judicial terrorism,” and stressing the Constitution’s clear separation of powers.

With ANI inputs