Murder Accused Throws Slipper at Judge in Thane Court

On December 23, 2024, a 22-year-old murder accused, Kiran Santosh Bharam, was involved in an incident at the District and Additional Sessions Court in Thane, Maharashtra. During a hearing before Judge RG Waghmare, Bharam expressed frustration over his lawyer's absence and requested the transfer of his case to another court. The judge advised him to file a formal application through his lawyer. When the lawyer failed to appear, Bharam was asked to provide the name of a new lawyer and was given another hearing date.

In a fit of frustration, Bharam reportedly threw a slipper towards the judge, which struck a wooden frame near the dais. This act led to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against him under Sections 132 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) and 125 (act endangering life or personal safety of others) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

This incident highlights the challenges faced by the judiciary in maintaining decorum and ensuring the safety of judicial officers during court proceedings. It underscores the importance of adequate legal representation for accused individuals to prevent such outbursts and ensure the smooth functioning of the judicial process.

The absence of Bharam's lawyer appears to have been a significant factor contributing to his frustration and subsequent actions. This situation emphasizes the critical role of defense attorneys in upholding the rights of the accused and facilitating proper legal procedures. It also raises questions about the mechanisms in place to provide legal assistance to individuals who may not have adequate representation, ensuring that justice is administered fairly and without disruption.

In response to the incident, court authorities may need to review security measures and protocols to prevent similar occurrences in the future. This could include ensuring the presence of legal representatives during hearings and implementing measures to address grievances of accused individuals promptly and effectively.

Overall, the episode serves as a reminder of the delicate balance required in the judicial system to maintain order, protect the rights of all parties involved, and uphold the rule of law.