When the Shoe Hits the Bench: Hatred, Judiciary, and the Erosion of Democratic Decency

The Supreme Court of India, often described as the temple of justice, witnessed an unprecedented and deeply disturbing act on October 6, 2025. A lawyer, in full public view, hurled his shoe at Chief Justice B.R. Gavai during case mentions. Though the attack was thwarted by security personnel and the CJI remained composed, the symbolic violence of the act has shaken the nation’s conscience. It is not merely an assault on an individual — it is an affront to the dignity of the judiciary, the Constitution, and the democratic ethos of India.

The opposition was swift and united in its condemnation. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge called it “abhorrent,” framing it as an attack on the rule of law and the dignity of a man who rose through merit and perseverance. Sonia Gandhi echoed the sentiment, urging the nation to stand in solidarity with the Chief Justice. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan went further, calling it a reflection of the hatred spread by the Sangh Parivar. Sharad Pawar, Supriya Shrinate, Sagarika Ghose, Manickam Tagore, and Imran Masood all pointed to a deeper malaise — a climate of intolerance, caste prejudice, and ideological fanaticism that has corroded public discourse and emboldened such acts.

But this incident cannot be dismissed as a lone act of madness. It must be understood as the culmination of years of rhetorical violence, institutional undermining, and social polarization. The attacker reportedly shouted “Sanatan ka apman nahi sahenge” — a slogan that has become a rallying cry in recent months, weaponized to silence dissent and intimidate those who challenge majoritarian narratives. The fact that this slogan was hurled at a Dalit Chief Justice, who embodies the constitutional promise of social mobility and justice, makes the act even more sinister.

Chief Justice Gavai’s rise to the highest judicial office is not just a personal achievement — it is a symbolic victory for the values enshrined in the Constitution. His presence on the bench is a reminder of Babasaheb Ambedkar’s dream: that the judiciary must reflect the diversity and dignity of India. To attack him in the courtroom, under the pretext of defending “Sanatan,” is to reject that dream. It is to say that caste hierarchies must remain untouched, that dissent is blasphemy, and that the judiciary must bow before ideological orthodoxy.

The RSS-BJP ecosystem, accused by the opposition of nurturing this climate, has yet to issue a strong statement condemning the attack. Silence, in this case, is not neutrality — it is complicity.

Data from recent years supports the opposition’s claim that intolerance is on the rise. According to the India Hate Tracker, incidents of hate speech and communal violence have increased by over 40% since 2019. The Supreme Court itself has repeatedly warned against the weaponization of religion in politics, most notably in its 2022 judgment reaffirming secularism as a basic feature of the Constitution. Yet, the line between online abuse and offline violence continues to blur. As Sagarika Ghose rightly pointed out, the BJP’s IT cell has normalized violent language, creating a culture where hashtags become hand grenades.

The Bar Council of India has suspended the lawyer involved, but disciplinary action alone cannot restore public faith. What is needed is a political and moral reckoning. When elected leaders remain silent or equivocate in the face of such attacks, they send a message that institutions are expendable and that ideology trumps legality. The judiciary, already under pressure from executive overreach and legislative encroachments, cannot afford to be physically or symbolically assaulted.

This incident also raises questions about courtroom security, the mental health of legal professionals, and the role of bar associations in maintaining decorum. But more than that, it forces us to ask: what kind of society are we becoming? One where shoes fly in courtrooms, where caste pride masquerades as religious sentiment, and where the highest judge in the land is targeted for his identity?

India’s democracy is not just about elections — it is about institutions, values, and the ability to disagree without violence. The attack on CJI Gavai is a warning sign that we are losing that ability. It is a black day not just for the judiciary, but for the republic itself. And unless we confront the hate that made this possible, we risk turning every courtroom into a battlefield, every dissenting voice into a target, and every constitutional promise into a casualty.

Let this moment be a turning point. Let the nation reaffirm its commitment to justice, dignity, and reason. Because when the shoe hits the bench, it’s not just leather — it’s the weight of a broken promise.