The Supreme Court of India on Thursday came down heavily on the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) over content in its Class VIII social science textbook discussing corruption in the judiciary, initiating suo motu contempt proceedings and imposing a blanket ban on the book’s publication and circulation.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi issued a show-cause notice to the Secretary (School Education) in the Ministry of Education and the Chairperson of NCERT, directing them to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.
Keywords:
Supreme Court contempt notice, NCERT Class 8 textbook controversy, judiciary corruption chapter, CJI Surya Kant remarks, textbook ban India, judicial dignity, contempt of court proceedings
Tags:
#SupremeCourt #NCERT #ContemptOfCourt #Judiciary #EducationPolicy #IndianLaw #CJI #InstitutionalIntegrity
Blanket Ban and Warning Against Circumvention
The Court imposed an immediate prohibition on any further publication or dissemination of the textbook. It made it clear that:
-
Any attempt to republish the same content under a different title,
-
Any digital circulation through electronic media,
-
Or any indirect method to continue distribution,
would be treated as direct interference with the administration of justice and amount to contempt of court.
The Bench further directed NCERT, in coordination with Union and State education departments, to ensure that all copies — whether hard or digital — currently in circulation, storage, retail outlets, or educational institutions, are immediately seized and removed from public access.
Summoning of Records and Accountability
The Court summoned:
-
The complete records relating to approval of the impugned chapter
-
The names of individuals involved in drafting and approving the content
Significantly, the directions were issued even though NCERT had released a press statement a day earlier expressing regret over its “error of judgment” and announcing withdrawal of the book.
However, the Bench appeared unconvinced that mere withdrawal would suffice.
Strong Observations by the Chief Justice
During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant described the episode as:
“a calculated move to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary.”
In a sharply worded remark, he stated:
“They fired the gunshot and the entire judiciary is bleeding.”
The CJI further made it clear that the Court would not close the suo motu proceedings until those responsible for the chapter were identified.
The Bench observed that the choice of language in the textbook may not be a simple inadvertent or bona fide error, hinting at the possibility of deliberate institutional targeting.
Role of Senior Counsel and Government’s Response
The matter was mentioned the previous day by senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Mukul Rohatgi, who urged the Court to take suo motu cognisance of what was being taught to schoolchildren about the judiciary.
Appearing for the Ministry of Education, Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India, submitted that the two individuals responsible for the chapter would never again be associated with the work of the Ministry.
The CJI termed this a “very light action,” cautioning that unchecked narratives of this nature could erode the sanctity of judicial office in public perception and particularly in the minds of young students.
Institutional Integrity vs Academic Critique
The Bench clarified that the proceedings are not aimed at stifling legitimate academic discussion. However, it stressed that criticism must be fair, balanced, and constitutionally informed — particularly in textbooks meant for impressionable students.
The Court signaled that safeguarding institutional credibility is intrinsic to maintaining constitutional governance and public confidence in the justice system.
What Lies Ahead
With contempt proceedings initiated, records summoned, and a nationwide recall ordered, the case now moves into a deeper accountability phase. The Court’s stance indicates that it views the issue not merely as an academic lapse but as a matter implicating constitutional institutions and public trust.
The next hearings are likely to focus on:
-
Determining individual responsibility
-
Assessing whether contempt jurisdiction should formally be invoked
-
Examining safeguards in textbook approval processes
The proceedings mark one of the strongest judicial interventions in the educational sphere in recent years.
By KANISHKSOCIALMEDIA For more updates on environmental regulations, public health policies, and developments in India’s governance, follow Kanishk Social Media for comprehensive and timely coverage of critical issues. If you found this article helpful, share it with others interested in India’s environmental efforts and policy innovation
0 Comments