Punishment for throwing a shoe at the Chief Justice of India: Legal position in India and other countries
Throwing a shoe at the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is a serious offense. Legally, it can amount to multiple crimes depending on intent, place, and consequences. Indian law does not have a specific “shoe-throwing” offense; instead, existing provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Contempt of Courts Act, and special security laws apply. Many other countries treat such acts as assault, contempt/disorderly conduct, or security breaches with similar penalties.
In India, such an act can lead to arrest, contempt of court proceedings, and prosecution for criminal intimidation/assault/attempt to outrage dignity, with possible imprisonment and fine. If done inside a courtroom or during judicial proceedings, contempt powers are immediate and severe. Security laws may also apply.
Indian law: Applicable offenses and likely punishment
- Criminal offenses under the IPC
- Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty: IPC 353/ BNS 221
Punishment: Up to 5 years imprisonment, or fine, or both. Enhanced if the act is grave or accompanied by injury or weapon. A shoe thrown as a projectile can qualify as “criminal force.” - Intentional insult to provoke breach of peace: IPC 504 / BNS 351
Punishment: Up to 2 years, or fine, or both. Applies if the act is done to provoke, insult, or incite. - Criminal intimidation: IPC 506 / BNS 351 & 352
Punishment: Up to 2 years for simple intimidation; higher if threat of death/grievous hurt. - Obstructing public servant (generic): IPC 186 / BNS 184
Punishment: Up to 3 months, or fine, or both. Usually added where assault is not clearly made out. - Attempt to cause hurt: IPC 323/324 read with 511 (if injury caused or weapon used) / BNS 115,116 read with 61.
Punishment varies: Half of the maximum term of imprisonment provided for the offence, or fine, or both. - Outraging the modesty or insult to dignity provisions are generally not applicable here unless distinct facts arise.
- Contempt of court (if incident occurs in, or relates to, court proceedings)
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (criminal contempt for scandalizing or lowering authority of court; obstructing administration of justice).
Punishment: Simple imprisonment up to 6 months, or fine up to ₹2,000, or both. The Supreme Court also has constitutional contempt powers under Articles 129 and 142. The Court often considers apology, remorse, and circumstances; however, physical acts targeting a judge can be treated as aggravated contempt.
Important: If the act occurs inside the Supreme Court during proceedings, the Court can proceed summarily against the contemnor. Contempt may run parallel to IPC prosecution.
- Special and security-related laws (context-dependent)
- If done within a “protected area,” or involving breach of security protocols, sections under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, or prohibitory orders under CrPC 144, or Delhi Police Act provisions (for incidents in Delhi) can apply.
- If a protest turns unlawful assembly/riot: IPC 141–151, 153.
Punishment varies by offense and gravity. - Aggravating and mitigating factors
- Aggravating: Targeting the CJI (constitutional functionary), inside court, intent to intimidate judiciary, prior threats, injury caused, coordinated act with others.
- Mitigating: No injury, spontaneous act, immediate apology, no prior record.
Practical outcome in India: First Information Report (FIR) usually invokes IPC 353, 504, 506, 186, possibly contempt if in-court. Bail is often granted unless other serious factors exist. Upon conviction, sentences can range from fines and short imprisonment to up to 5 years depending on the IPC section proved, plus up to 6 months for contempt where invoked. Courts sometimes accept an unconditional written apology in contempt but still allow criminal trial to proceed.
Comparative perspective: How other countries treat similar acts
- United States: Treated as assault/battery or disorderly conduct; if targeting a judge or occurring in court, could be contempt of court with immediate sanctions. Penalties vary by state—typically fines, probation, or short jail time; enhanced if an official is performing duties.
- United Kingdom: Could constitute common assault or battery, or public order offenses (Public Order Act). If in court, contempt powers apply. Sentences range from fines to months of custody depending on harm and intent.
- Canada: Assault under the Criminal Code; if in court, contempt of court. Dispositions range from discharge/probation to short custodial terms depending on circumstances.
- Australia: Assault/affray/public order offenses; contempt if in judicial setting. Penalties similar to UK/Canada.
- Pakistan/Bangladesh/Sri Lanka: Similar IPC-derived frameworks: assault on public servant (equivalent of IPC 353), criminal force, and contempt if directed at the court or judge.
Overall pattern: Most jurisdictions classify shoe-throwing at a high public official or judge as assault/criminal force and, when in a courtroom, as contempt of court with swift punitive powers. Actual punishment depends on injury, intent, disruption, and security breach severity.
Procedure and immediate consequences in India
- Arrest and booking under relevant IPC sections; production before a magistrate within 24 hours.
- If inside Supreme Court or High Court, the court can initiate suo motu contempt.
- Bail consideration typically quick unless aggravating factors exist.
- Trial proceeds on IPC charges; contempt may be disposed by apology or punished separately.
- Possible additional consequences: security blacklists, restrictions from court premises, and long-term repercussions on government employment clearances.
Practical guidance for handling such incidents (policy/administrative)
- Ensure coordinated FIR sections: BNS 221, 351,352,184; add hurt sections if injury occurred; add PDPP Act if property damaged; add unlawful assembly if part of a group.
- If in court, place facts before the Registrar for consideration of criminal contempt.
- Document evidence: CCTV, eyewitness accounts, recovery of the projectile, forensic examination if injury.
- Consider conditional leniency only where there is genuine remorse, no injury, and no intent to intimidate the judiciary.
Bottom line
- In India, shoe-throwing at the Chief Justice can lead to criminal prosecution (up to 5 years under IPC 353 in serious cases) and separate contempt of court proceedings (up to 6 months) if related to court functioning, along with fines.
- Other democracies treat similar acts as assault/disorderly conduct and, in judicial settings, contempt—resulting in fines, probation, or short custodial sentences based on harm and intent.
