Context
A shocking incident occurred in the Supreme Court of India when a lawyer allegedly hurled a shoe at Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud Gavai, reportedly over his earlier remarks in a case concerning the reconstruction of a Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho. The remarks had been misinterpreted on social media, leading to an online campaign accusing the CJI of “hurting Hindu sentiments.”
The editorial reflects on the attack not merely as a law-and-order lapse but as a symptom of deepening intolerance and breakdown of democratic civility.
Key Highlights
- Attack on Judiciary as an Institution
- The incident represents more than an assault on one individual — it symbolizes disrespect toward the judiciary, the Constitution, and the rule of law.
- The bipartisan condemnation, including from Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who called the act “reprehensible,” underscores a rare political consensus defending institutional dignity.
- Symbolism of a Dalit CJI
- CJI Gavai’s identity as a Dalit carries a powerful democratic symbolism — his rise to the top court embodies social mobility and inclusion within India’s constitutional framework.
- The attack therefore bears a dual stigma — against the judiciary and against representation from marginalized communities.
- The Broader Pattern: Manufactured Intolerance
- The editorial links the event to the larger narrative of performative victimhood, where “Hinduism under siege” rhetoric is used to justify mob aggression and suppress dissent.
- Such narratives have been politically instrumentalized to polarize society and narrow public discourse.
- The silence or selective blindness of political actors to these trends often legitimizes intolerance.
- PM’s Condemnation as a Test Case
- The Prime Minister’s strong words could mark a turning point if followed by consistent action against similar intolerance.
- The editorial calls for the condemnation to be read not only as outrage at one act, but as a rebuke to the climate of hatred and hyper-sensitivity that threatens democratic debate.