Judiciary – Supreme Court Acts on Class 8 Textbook Dispute
Judiciary – The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed strong displeasure over content in a newly introduced Class 8 NCERT textbook that discussed alleged corruption within the judiciary. Taking note of the matter during a brief mention, the court announced that it would initiate suo motu proceedings to examine the issue independently.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant stated that the court had already passed an order to take up the matter on its own. He made it clear that the integrity of the judiciary must not be undermined. The Chief Justice emphasized that no individual or authority, regardless of position, would be allowed to damage the credibility of the institution. He added that appropriate legal steps would follow if required.
Objections Raised During Court Mention
The matter was brought to the court’s attention by senior advocate Kapil Sibal. During submissions, he criticized the inclusion of content relating to corruption in the judiciary in the Class 8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). He also flagged the reported removal of chapters dealing with the constitutional structure from the curriculum.
Sibal described the development as deeply concerning, arguing that such content could affect students’ understanding of constitutional institutions. His remarks prompted the bench to respond firmly, signaling that the issue would be examined at the highest level.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who was part of the bench, also expressed reservations. He observed that certain changes appeared to conflict with constitutional principles, indicating that the matter raised significant concerns about the educational portrayal of foundational democratic institutions.
NCERT Withdraws Revised Textbook
Amid growing controversy, NCERT withdrew the revised Class 8 Social Science textbook from circulation just a day after its release. The book had recently been introduced but was reportedly removed from sale following instructions from the organization’s Sales Division.
Sources indicated that copies were not available even at NCERT’s own office after the withdrawal decision. The swift action came after criticism emerged regarding a chapter that addressed judicial accountability and referenced complaints against members of the judiciary.
Chapter on Judiciary Sparks Debate
The chapter titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society” included a section explaining how judges are governed by a code of conduct. It mentioned international standards such as the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, which require judges to act with fairness, independence, and integrity in both professional and personal matters.
The textbook further explained that if these standards are not maintained, internal mechanisms exist within the judicial system to address grievances. It referred to the Centralised Public Grievance Redressal and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) as a platform where complaints can be lodged. According to the text, more than 1,600 judiciary-related complaints were recorded between 2017 and 2021.
In addition, the chapter stated that in serious situations, judges may face removal through impeachment by Parliament, outlining the constitutional process for accountability.
Wider Questions on Curriculum and Institutions
The controversy has sparked broader discussions on how constitutional bodies and public institutions are presented in school textbooks. While some argue that civic education should include information about accountability mechanisms, others contend that sensitive institutional matters must be handled with caution in academic material for young students.
The Supreme Court’s decision to take suo motu cognisance underscores the seriousness with which it views the issue. The forthcoming proceedings are expected to clarify whether the textbook content was appropriate within the framework of constitutional values and educational guidelines.
As the matter moves forward, attention will likely remain on the balance between transparency in civic education and safeguarding the reputation of constitutional institutions.