Voices. Verdicts. Vision

Voices. Verdicts. Vision

Bar Council of India Suspends Advocate After Attempted Attack on CJI

Advocate Suspension

The Bar Council of India (BCI) issued a notice on October 6, 2025 by placing Advocate Rakesh Kishore, enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi (Enrolment No. D/1647/2009), under immediate suspension from practice after an incident in Court No. 1 of the Supreme Court, where he allegedly removed his sports shoes and attempted to hurl them towards the Chief Justice of India during proceedings. The act, described as prima facie inconsistent with the dignity of the court, was swiftly contained by court security.

The order, issued by BCI Chairman and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, notes that such conduct violates the fundamental standards of professional conduct and etiquette expected of advocates under Chapter II (Part VI), Section I, Rules 1 to 3 of the Bar Council of India Rules, as framed under the Advocates Act, 1961. During pending disciplinary proceedings, the Advocate stands debarred from appearing, acting, pleading, or practising before any court, tribunal, or authority across India.The BCD has been instructed to update its records and notify all courts and tribunals within its jurisdiction about the suspension, ensuring that Advocate Rakesh Kishore is immediately marked as barred from practice. The order further directed that any identity card, proximity pass, or access permission issued to the advocate by any court or Bar Association shall remain inoperative for the duration of the suspension, restricting his physical and digital access.Finally, the notice of suspension is to be served by the BCD at the advocate’s registered address and email ID, and a compliance report confirming delivery must be filed with the BCI within two days.The Advocate is also required to file an affidavit of compliance physically at the BCI and BCD offices in addition with a notarised scanned copy of the same to bciindo@gmail.com, confirming non-appearance in any matter.

Lastly, the BCI emphasized that this was an interim measure, issued without prejudice to further disciplinary or legal proceedings under the Advocates Act, 1961 or general law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *