They pronounce judgements from on high.

"A former employee of the Supreme Court has made allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi in an affidavit that she has sent to all the judges in the court," wrote AA Mahaprashasta. The alleged sexual harassment happened on October 10 and 11, 2018. "The woman has since been dismissed from service and seen her whole life fall apart. First, her husband and one of her brothers-in-law -- both employed with the Delhi Police -- were suspended on allegedly frivolous grounds. "Next another brother-in-law who was appointed junior court attendant" "was also dismissed from service without reason." "Finally, she was arrested in a case of bribery in March 2019" but the bribe giver has indicated that "he was not keen to pursue the matter". She says that her legs were chained all night after arrest. A panel consisting of three sitting judges, SA Bobde, NV Ramana and Indira Banerjee, of the Supreme Court was set up. Justice Ramana has been replaced by Justice Indu Malhotra after "trashing" the woman's claims. Suddenly, a lawyer Utsav Bains filed an affidavit that he was approached by a "fixer" who wanted to discredit the Chief Justice. A parallel inquiry, chaired by former justice of the Supreme Court AK Patnaik, "will look into the allegations that disgruntled employees were part of a conspiracy to frame the chief justice in the sexual harassment case". So, the case has already been decided against the complainant and the inquiry is merely to find proof. The response of the CJI to the allegations "showed not just lack of sensitivity, but also of propriety. In his defence, he appeared to cast doubt on her integrity and tried to contrast it with his own, which he sought to establish via the irrelevant example of a modest bank balance". "He went as far as to contend that the complaint was an attack on the judiciary." Despite creation of the inquiry committee, "doubts persist over the committee's legality, over whether it can at all scrutinise allegations made against the CJI, and over whether its composition lacks a moral base in that no external members have been included", wrote S Parthasarathy. "In the legal profession, sexual harassment is rampant. It is extremely difficult for women to come forward," said M Sood. "The question is, should such a thing happen, is there impunity? The answer is, yes," said K Nundy. Both are advocates of the Supreme Court. "That lawyers are generally dishonest is a well-known fact. Lawyers are (frequently) humorously called liars, and because they are the middle-men between judges and litigating public, they act like dishonest brokers," wrote former justice of the Supreme Court Ruma Pal. Relating the case of police falsely implicating a rickshaw-puller in the  rape and murder of a little girl, S Shekhar asked "when will the judicial process become sensitive in a country where 106 incidents of rape take place every day? If the Supreme Court is breaking the law, the answer is 'never'.