The Supreme Court declared that the constitutional right to speech and expression cannot come at the expense of others’ integrity and dignity, calling unregulated social media behaviour a “money-spinning venture”. A bench led by Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi made these remarks amid deliberations around contempt proceedings against advocate Rakesh Kishore, who attempted to hurl a shoe at Chief Justice B. R. Gavai during court sessions.
The court’s rebuke emphasised that freedom of expression is not absolute; it must respect boundaries that protect individuals and institutions from defamation, insult, or incitement. The bench underscored that actions such as the shoe attack are symptomatic of social media descending into spectacle and sensationalism rather than responsible discourse.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court that the Attorney General had approved the initiation of criminal contempt action against Kishore. The advocate, aged 71, removed his shoe and attempted to throw it during proceedings on 6 October. He was promptly restrained and taken into custody. CJI Gavai responded by describing the incident as shocking, but affirmed that the court would proceed with its work. The bench noted that Kishore had given multiple media interviews after the event, deepening the challenge to the institutional dignity of the judiciary.
While condemning Kishore’s act, the court said it was not opposed to free speech in principle. It stated: “We are not against freedom of speech and expression but this right cannot be exercised at the cost of integrity and dignity of others.” The bench also suggested that a broader order, akin to a John Doe injunction, might be appropriate to restrain online platforms from broadcasting defamatory or demeaning content tied to the case.
This ruling intersects with the Supreme Court’s earlier judgments holding digital content creators accountable. In August, the Court held that content by influencers lacks immunity when it degrades or mocks public figures or vulnerable groups; five individuals were ordered to publish public apologies after derogatory remarks targeting persons with disabilities. The court also asked stakeholders to help frame guidelines regulating content by social media creators, especially when monetisation is involved.
Shah Declines to Promise Nitish’s Return as Chief Minister 