Should this institution built by Palkhivala et al be allowed to be managed by money, muscle power? Justice Arun Mishra

In a dramatic outburst, Justice Arun Mishra today cautioned against attempts to manage the Supreme Court by money and muscle power. The judge made the observation while hearing the suo motu case concerning sexual harassment allegations against Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi..Justice Mishra, who was on the Bench along with Justices Rohinton Nariman and Deepak Gupta, was triggered towards the end of the hearing when Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought an SIT probe into the matter..“The way this institution is being treated for the last 3 to 4 years is as if this institution is going to die. People of this country should know the truth..Do the powerful of this country think they can run this country?”, said Justice Mishra..The judge also warned the Bar and the Solicitor General not to provoke him to say “many things”..“Every day we hear of Bench fixing. Can the Registry be allowed to be managed by muscle and money power?.This institution belongs to you (Bar). This institution has been built by Nani Palkhivala, Attorney General, Fali Nariman etc..We (judges) come and go”, said Mishra..Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that he is completely with the Bench and that the institution should be preserved. He said,.“I am also saying exactly what Your Lordships are saying, the institution should be protected.”.On the other hand, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising maintained that the government should be kept out of this..The Court then reserved its order, which will be pronounced at 2 pm today..Earlier, when the hearing began, advocate Utsav Bains had handed over more material to the Bench in another sealed cover..Bains had, however, refused to divulge certain communications, citing privilege. Both Attorney General KK Venugopal and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Rakesh Kumar Khanna had opposed the stance..Venugopal told the Court that Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act will have no application in this case. He also said that there was no attorney-client privilege involved in the matter since the person who allegedly approached Bains was turned away by him..“Who is his client? According to his affidavit, one Ajay came to him for arranging a press conference and offered Rs. 50 lakh. But he declined. So Ajay is not his client..Even if Ajay is his client, the second proviso of S. 126 comes in”, submitted AG KK Venugopal..Indira Jaising expressed apprehension that this Bench might go into the allegations made by the complainant..She said that either this Bench should steer clear of making any judgment calls on the allegations by the lady, or both the matters should be clubbed and heard together..The Bench made it clear that it will not go into allegations of sexual harassment raised by Supreme Court staffer..Interestingly, Jaising maintained her stance that Utsav Bains had entered the Supreme Court in a car without an entry sticker on April 22. She said that the Court should, therefore, go into the bona fides of Bains. She said,.“I have reconfirmed the entry of the car without a sticker. I have enquired about the procedure for such entry. And it cannot be done without the knowledge of Registry..So credentials of Utsav Bains must be gone into. The Court should make sure he has come with clean hands.”.The Bench will pronounce its order at 2 pm today.