Supreme Court Questions NCERT Over Class 8 Chapter on Judiciary

Supreme Court Questions NCERT Over Class 8 Chapter on Judiciary

An irate Supreme Court on Thursday pulled up the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) over its Class 8 textbook chapter on “corruption” in the judiciary.

The council, on its part, called it an error and decided to rewrite the chapter of the book in consultation with the appropriate authority.

Swatting aside the NCERT’s defense, the Chief Justice Surya Kant today said he did not see any apology in the official press release.

The NCERT introduced a section on “corruption in the judiciary” in its new Class 8 Social Science textbook, marking a significant shift from earlier editions that largely focused on the structure and role of courts.

Here are the Chief Justice’s top quotes in the case:

* Judiciary is bleeding today. This looks like a deep-rooted conspiracy

* I don’t see any apology in the clarification press release

* It is a very calculated move

* Our friends in media sent this notice. There is no word of apology in this (Chief Justice on NCERT’s apology note)

* It is our institutional duty to find out if it was published in the book or not… This was a deep rooted conspiracy

* That will be very easy then and they go scotfree. They fired the gunshot. Judiciary is bleeding today (Chief Justice to the argument that the officials who prepared the chapters will never work with UGC or any ministry)

* We would like to have a deeper probe. We need to find who is responsible and we will see who are there. Heads must roll. We will not close the case

* Upon a prima facie examination of the content, it appears to us that this is a deliberate ploy to undermine the authority and prestige of the judiciary – if allowed to continue unchecked, it will tarnish the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the general public

* The framers of our constitution were profoundly conscious and took care that constitutional responsibilities are prescribed … legislature, judiciary and executive and so that they remain capable of performing with autonomy and preserve the democratic fabric of our nation

* By acknowledging constitutionally described demarcations we were nearly shocked when a leading newspaper published an article regarding release of the social science textbook for grade (II) titled exploring society India and beyond first edition published in February 2026 by NCERT

* A portion is titled “role of judiciary in our society” and it states “corruption in the judiciary”, the inclusion of this within a foundational curriculum in our considered opinion warrants a rigorous review for the impact on the functioning of judiciary as a whole.

* We are reluctant to reproduce the chapter… but it prominently refers to hundreds of complaints received against judiciary indicating as if no action was taken and taking a few words from the speech of a former CJI suggesting that judiciary itself has acknowledged lack of transparency and institutional corruption

* The article goes on to state that people experience various levels of corruption in the judiciary

* Instead of filing an introspection of what has been written in the book in an extremely contemptuous and reckless manner, the UGC director wrote back defending the content

* This, if allowed to go unchecked will erode the sanctity of judicial office in estimation of public at large and within impressionable minds of youth

* While the publication dedicates entire chapter on role of judiciary in our society, it washes away the illustrious history of SC, HC and trial courts, it is omitted and the role played by the institution towards preservation of democratic fabric, the text fails to recognise role of judiciary which upheld the basic structure doctrine

* It seems to us that the narrative in the book tries to delve not in any transformative measures heralded by this court which includes legal aid mechanism and streamlining access to justice

* The silence particularly is egregious since so many high ranking officers have been held by this court for corruption, misuse of public office or diversion of funds, It seems to us that the choice of words, expressions, in the book may not be simpliciter inadvertent or bona fide error

* We hasten to add that we do not propose the suo motu proceedings to stifle any legitimate critique or exercising right to scrutinise judiciary

* We are of the firm conviction that rigorous discourse helps the living vitality of the institution

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by VoM News staff and is published from the syndicated feed)