The Supreme Court of India (SC) pronounced a momentous judgment in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan in 1997, categorically recognizing the menace of sexual harassment (SH) at workplace and constitutionally rendering it as being in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India 1950. The Court also provided a mechanism for redressal against SH, which was ultimately reinforced by Parliament with the enactment of Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 (POSH Act). However, when it comes to allegations of SH against judges in the SC and High Courts by its employees, interns, or lower court judges, the response of the SC has been abysmal to say the least. There is a systematic pattern to suggest foul play and conspiracy in each such allegation, and judges, including even the Chief Justice of India (CJI), have not hesitated to openly indulge in victim-shaming and-blaming. In other words, the court has not been able to uphold its own jurisprudence on sexual harassment, which it expects to be scrupulously adhered to by other organs of the state. It is submitted that in not supporting the cause of victims alleging SH against judges, the other organs of the state are also party to this constitutional decay and serious infraction of fundamental rights. It leads us to ask the question, how can we guard against the guardians?

中文翻译：

---

司法机构丑闻：印度最高法院对法官性骚扰指控反应不一的分析

印度最高法院 (SC) 于 1997 年在 Vishaka 诉拉贾斯坦邦一案中宣布了一项重大判决，明确承认工作场所性骚扰 (SH) 的威胁，并在宪法上将其视为侵犯了第 15 条所保障的基本权利， 1950 年印度宪法第 19 条和第 21 条。法院还提供了针对 SH 的补救机制，最终通过议会颁布的 2013 年工作场所性骚扰（预防、禁止和补救）法案（POSH 法案）得到加强。然而，当谈到 SH 对其雇员、实习生或下级法院法官对 SC 和高等法院法官的指控时，SC 的反应至少可以说是糟糕透了。在每项此类指控中都有一个系统模式表明犯规和阴谋，法官，甚至包括印度首席大法官（CJI）在内，都毫不犹豫地公开沉迷于羞辱和指责受害者。换句话说，法院未能坚持自己关于性骚扰的判例，它期望国家其他机关严格遵守。据称，在不支持受害者对法官提出 SH 指控的情况下，国家其他机关也是这种宪法腐烂和严重侵犯基本权利的一方。这就引出了一个问题，我们如何防范监护人？据称，在不支持受害者对法官提出 SH 指控的情况下，国家其他机关也是这种宪法腐烂和严重侵犯基本权利的一方。这就引出了一个问题，我们如何防范监护人？据称，在不支持受害者对法官提出 SH 指控的情况下，国家其他机关也是这种宪法腐烂和严重侵犯基本权利的一方。这就引出了一个问题，我们如何防范监护人？