Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai on Monday, October 6, reportedly decided that no action would be taken against a man dressed in a lawyer's robe, who attempted to disrupt proceedings in the Supreme Court earlier in the day, by allegedly attempting to throw an object at the CJI Gavai-led Bench.
Reportedly, the man approached the dais and allegedly tried to remove his shoe, but security personnel intervened immediately and escorted him out of the courtroom. While being taken away, he was heard shouting slogans referring to Sanatan Dharma. The proceedings were briefly interrupted, but CJI Gavai remained composed and continued without pause.
“Don't get distracted by all this. We are not distracted. These things do not affect me,” he said.
Later, sources confirmed that CJI Gavai had conveyed that the matter should be ignored and no further action should be initiated against the individual concerned.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) unanimously passed a resolution expressing “deep anguish and disapproval” over the purported advocate’s act who allegedly made “an unwarranted and intemperate gesture” aimed at disrespecting the CJI Gavai-led Bench. Terming the conduct “unbecoming of a member of the Bar”, the SCAORA said it struck at the very foundation of mutual respect that sustains the relationship between the Bench and the Bar.
“This behaviour is antithetical to the dignity of the legal profession and contrary to the constitutional values of decorum, discipline, and institutional integrity,” the resolution stated. It added that any attempt to malign or personalise gestures against sitting judges of the Supreme Court constitutes “a direct assault on the independence of the judiciary and undermines public faith in the justice delivery system.”
The bar body urged the apex court to take suo motu cognisance of the incident and initiate appropriate contempt proceedings. SCAORA said the act was “a calculated move to scandalise the authority of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and lower its dignity in the eyes of the public”.
“Such a course would serve as a necessary reminder that freedom of speech, while sacrosanct, carries with it a duty of restraint, particularly for members of the legal profession who are officers of the Court,” the resolution added.