Home / Uncategorized / WAS THE SHOE-THROWER A PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC?
WAS THE SHOE-THROWER A PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC?
No Comments on WAS THE SHOE-THROWER A PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC?

WAS THE SHOE-THROWER A PARANOID SCHIZOPHRENIC?

Uncategorized October 11, 2025 , by

By Dr Olav & Deborah Albuquerque

WHEN Rakesh Kishore hurled a shoe at the CJI, Bhushan R Gavai, he succeeded in uniting the Opposition to flay him and the ruling BJP for creating communal hatred. He thereby opened a Pandora’s box, claiming he was told to do so by “divine command.” This makes him either a paranoid schizophrenic or a saint, if it is true. In any case, this lawyer has no right to use violence against the head of the entire judicial family in India.
A week or more earlier, dismissing a PIL as a “publicity interest litigation,” the CJI had said, “This is purely publicity interest litigation… Go and ask the deity himself to do something. If you are saying that you are a strong devotee of Lord Vishnu, then you pray and do some meditation.”
In a clarification later, the CJI said that he respects all religions. “Someone told me the other day that the comments I made have been portrayed on social media in a certain manner… I respect all religions,” CJI Gavai said. Rakesh Kishore, who has been quoted as a “senior advocate” by the media, was forgiven by the CJI who told the registrar of the Supreme Court not to press charges and to return his shoes and other belongings. This was why the Delhi Police let Rakesh Kishore go after grilling him for three hours.
PRAISEWORTHY
CJI GAVAI
THE magnanimity of CJI Gavai is praiseworthy. He is a neo-Buddhist and a follower of BR Ambedkar who believed in the annihilation of caste. Buddhists are agnostic who do not believe in any personal god but in escaping the endless cycle of rebirth by doing good. The CJI’s mother had reportedly refused an invite from the RSS to attend their centenary celebrations because she affirmed she was an Ambedkarite.
Another reason for the magnanimity of CJI Gavai could be because he did not want his remarks to be recycled in the media and raise another controversy. This does not mean that Rakesh Kishore will go unpunished because the Bar Council of India has suspended his licence to practice law throughout India, and he will still be prosecuted for hurling a shoe at the CJI whether he genuinely believed he was acting under “divine command” or not.
If Rakesh Kishore is really a designated “senior advocate” as media reports claim he is, then the system of designating senior advocates is seriously flawed. Rakesh Kishore apparently did not have much of a legal practice, which is why it is questionable as to whether he was really designated a “senior advocate” or not. He claims to be an MSc and a rank holder at the LLM degree, apart from having a PhD. This makes his offence even more serious.
The book titled “The God Delusion” by the British evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, posits people like Rakesh Kishore who claims to have defended God against CJI Gavai. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than having God on your side. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name should be used sparingly. These religious fanatics are trying to force governments to follow their positions 100 per cent.
Dawkins goes on to add that if you disagree with these religious groups on any moral issue, they threaten you with a loss of money, or votes or both. Every religious group claims it has some God-granted right.
The very fact that a delusional Rakesh Kishore claims to have been visited by God to attack CJI Gavai proves Dawkin’s argument. The Supreme Court collegium claims to be inspired by wisdom and intelligence over and above that of the common man. This is why they choose judges like Sureshwar Thakur of the Punjab and Haryana high court who wrote gibberish instead of well-reasoned judgments, so that all his judgments had to be quashed, according to CJI Gavai. It is when we cease to question those in authority that we deify them, making them gods when they are fallible human beings.
AYODHYA JUDGMENT
THE 50th CJI Dhananjaya Thakur claimed to have been inspired by God to write the Ayodhya judgment. This statement has invited opprobrium from senior lawyers like Dushyant Dave and retired Supreme Court judges like Rohinton Nariman. Judges take an oath to uphold the Constitution and set aside their religious beliefs. Chandrachud did just the opposite when he claimed to have been inspired by God. Without meaning disrespect to the retired CJI, there seems to be much in common between Chandrachud and Rakesh Kishore. Both claim to have been inspired by God.
This same former CJI DY Chandrachud dragged in his religious inculturation when he said in May 2022 that the Places of Worship Act of 1991 did not prevent determining a site’s “religious character” while hearing the Gyanvapi mosque case. This has opened a Pandora’s box with a large number of cases being filed claiming mosques were built over temples razed centuries earlier. This interpretation by Chandrachud defeated the aim of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 which froze all places of worship as they existed on the date of independence.
Like the news anchor who proclaims “The nation wants to know” and equates the majority religion with nationalism, judges who drag in their religious beliefs while writing judgments are as dangerous as Sureshwar Thakur, whose murder conviction had to be set aside because of utter incomprehensibility.
Both the authors are firm theists who believe in Jesus Christ but at the same time concede that atheists like the physicist Steven Hawking, Richard Dawkins who point out that scientists who have shown us that the universe which contains billions of galaxies is much grander that the theists who claimed that the earth was the centre of the universe, do have their own right to educate us.
This is why CJI Bhushan Gavai is an anachronism because he does not keep dragging in the holy name of God to justify his judgments.
(Dr Olav Albuquerque holds a PhD in law and is a senior journalist-cum-advocate of the Bombay high court. His wife, Deborah Albuquerque, holds BCom, CAIIB and LLM degree and is a practising advocate. Dr Olav is an honorary member of the Goa Union of Journalists.)

No related posts.

Search

Back to Top