SC orders seizure, bans NCERT book over ‘corruption in judiciary’ chapter

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered an immediate nationwide withdrawal and imposed a complete blanket ban on a Class 8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), observing that references to “corruption in the judiciary” in the chapter, prima facie, reflected a “discernible underlying agenda to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary”.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, while hearing the suo motu matter titled “In Re: Social Science Textbook for Grade–8 (Part-2) published by NCERT and ancillary issues,” observed that although the chapter purported to discuss the role of the judiciary, it “washes off with one stroke of the pen the illustrious history associated with the Supreme Court, the High Courts, and the District Courts,” and “conspicuously omits the substantive contributions made by these institutions towards the preservation of our democratic fabric.”

Further, the Bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, said that the text failed to acknowledge the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional morality and the Basic Structure doctrine, principles described as “the very lifeblood of the Indian citizens in public existence”.

The controversy pertains to Chapter 4 of the Grade 8 textbook titled “Exploring Society: India and Beyond”, which includes a sub-topic on “Corruption in the Judiciary”.

Referring to a newspaper report dated February 24, 2026, the apex court noted that the chapter makes “prominent reference to hundreds of complaints received against the judiciary, clearly indicating, as if no action was taken,” and asserts that “people do experience corruption of various levels of the judiciary”.

“We were nearly shocked” upon learning of the publication of the textbook, the Supreme Court recorded, adding that the inclusion of such material in a foundational school curriculum required “a rigorous review of its pedagogical suitability and its potential impact on the institutional standing of the Judiciary as a whole.”

On a prima facie examination of the textbook and the written response submitted by the NCERT Director defending its inclusion, the CJI Kant-led Bench held that the material reveals “a discernible underlying agenda to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary”.

“This would, if allowed to go unchecked, erode the sanctity of the judicial office in the estimation of the public at large and, more importantly, within the impressionable minds of the youth,” the apex court cautioned.

At the same time, the CJI Kant-led Bench clarified that the proceedings were not intended to stifle legitimate criticism.

“We do not propose to initiate the suo moto proceedings to stifle any legitimate critique or to bring to task any individual or organisation exercising their right to scrutinise public institutions, including the Judiciary. On the contrary, we remain of the firm conviction that dissent, deliberation and rigorous discourse constitute the very vitality of a living democracy and serve as essential instruments of institutional accountability,” the order said.

The intervention, it added, was necessitated by the need “to safeguard the pedagogical integrity of the national curriculum”, observing that it is “fundamentally improper to expose” young students to a “biased narrative” at a formative stage.

Observing that the choice of words “may not be a simpliciter inadvertent or bona fide error,” the Supreme Court warned that if the publication was found to be deliberate, it could fall within the ambit of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as it may amount to scandalising the institution and interfering with the administration of justice.

Taking note of an NCERT press release stating that distribution of the book had been halted, that the chapter would be rewritten, and that an apology had been tendered, the CJI Kant-led Bench said the genuineness of the apology would be examined at a later stage.

“The question as to whether the apology has been tendered genuinely with a view to purging the prima facie contempt, or whether it is merely a ruse to evade the consequences, particularly when substantial irreversible damage has already been done, is a matter that we will consider at an appropriate stage,” the apex court said.

Issuing show-cause notices, the Supreme Court directed the Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Education, Government of India, and Professor (Dr.) Dinesh Prasad Saklani, Director, NCERT, to explain why action under the Contempt of Courts Act or other penal provisions should not be initiated against them or those responsible for introducing the “offending chapter”.

Pending further consideration, the apex court directed NCERT, in coordination with the Union government and state education authorities, to immediately seize and remove all physical and digital copies of the textbook from schools, retail outlets, storage facilities and online platforms.

It further imposed “a complete blanket ban” on any further publication, reprinting or digital dissemination of “Exploring Society: India and Beyond”, warning that any attempt to circulate the same content would be treated as a wilful breach and defiance of its directions.

Fixing personal accountability, the CJI Kant-led Bench made it the responsibility of the NCERT Director and principals of all schools where the book had been circulated to ensure immediate seizure and sealing of copies and to halt any teaching based on its contents. Principal Secretaries of Education across all states and UTs (union territories) have been directed to file compliance affidavits within two weeks.

Additionally, the NCERT Director has been asked to furnish a comprehensive list of members of the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee who approved the chapter, the names and credentials of the Textbook Development Team responsible for drafting it, and the original minutes of meetings where the chapter was deliberated and finalised.

In its order, the apex observed that the framers of the Constitution had carefully ensured institutional autonomy among the legislature, executive and judiciary while requiring them to function in harmony to preserve democratic values.

“The framers of our Constitution were profoundly conscious and took abundant caution to ensure that constitutional responsibilities were inscribed with such precision that the three pillars, namely, the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, remain capable of operating with institutional autonomy while functioning in concert to preserve the democratic fabric of our nation,” it said.

The matter has been posted for further hearing on March 11, 2026.

IANS