‘Throwing Shoe to Express Dissent Isn’t Permissible in Civilized Society’
Shivendra Patap Singh, a Law intern at the Lucknow Bench, says that judges must show some restraint and empathy while discussing matters of faith. His views:
First of all, I strongly condemn the action of now-suspended advocated Rakesh Kishore where he infamously hurled a shoe at CJI BR Gavai. This was not only a shocking incident but it also sent an alarming message about the relation between the two of its most important constituents of Indian judicial system – a lawyer and a judge.
There are better ways to register your protest but to opt for hurling one’s footwear to a constitutional authority can never be justified, by any length of argument. Incidentally, Kishore defended his action by telling the media that he was deeply hurt by the CJI’s remark during a previous hearing wherein Justice Gavai had “mocked a PIL and said ‘Go pray to the idol, ask it to restore its own head’.”
On social media, it has vertically split the users and the commentariat: while some are criticizing the action, others are eulogizing Kishore for standing up to matters of faith. The latter section has argued that the CJI only gets critical and mocks issues related to a particular faith (Hinduism) and has challenged him to take a similar stance in cases related to other religions.
Although many political leaders and activists came together seeking strict action against Kishore from the central government, the CJI, in a wiser move, chose not to press any action against him. Although, a zero FIR was registered against Kishore in Bengaluru – meaning a case registered for an alleged offence committed elsewhere (New Delhi) which would now be transferred to Delhi police as per due legal process.
Being a Law Intern, I can only advise caution to both the aggrieved and those sitting on the judgment. A court of law is revered place, a temple of justice no less. A certain decorum is expected of the visitors to keep dignity of the hallowed precincts alive.
On the other hand, it would behove well if those entrusted with delivering justice to aggrieved parties also show some restraint while hearing the matters of faith. Empathy is the hallmark of justice. One need not be distasteful or condescending of a petitioner merely because it clashes with one’s own belief system; their words must not hurt the sentiments of any particular community or faith.
It is not only the responsibility of only one side or a person (in any conversation or dispute). We, as responsible humans and participants of a society, should behave in such a way so as not to hurt the sentiments and feelings of anyone.
This equally applies to social media users as well, who like to fan the fire during any such conflict. Social media plays a vital role in our lives, we should restrain from commenting or making any such observation that could blow things out of proportion and cause damage to our justice delivery system.
As told to Rajat Rai
