NEW DELHI: In a rare intersection of education policy and judicial authority, India’s Supreme Court has intervened decisively in a controversy surrounding a newly released Class 8 textbook by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT).
The book, which included a section highlighting corruption within the judiciary, sparked outrage from the apex court, leading to a complete ban on its distribution and a probe into its creation.
India’s Supreme Court has imposed a complete blanket ban on the publication, reprinting, digital dissemination, and ordered the immediate seizure of all physical copies in circulation of a newly revised Class 8 Social Science textbook by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT).
What Sparked the Row? The Controversial Chapter in Detail
The controversy centers on NCERT’s newly revised Class 8 Social Science textbook titled Exploring Society: India and Beyond Part 2 (Vol II), released under the framework of the National Education Policy. Chapter 4 titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society,” the chapter marked a departure from previous editions, which primarily covered the hierarchy of courts and access to justice.
For the first time, it introduced discussions on systemic challenges, including “corruption at various levels of the judiciary,” a massive backlog of cases (citing approximately 81,000 pending in the Supreme Court, 62,40,000 in High Courts, and crores in lower courts), and issues like inadequate numbers of judges, complicated legal procedures, and poor infrastructure. It stated that judges are bound by a code of conduct, including the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, which require them to remain fair, impartial and maintain integrity in both personal and professional life.
Complaints can be filed through the Centralised Public Grievance Redressal and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS), with over 1,600 judiciar related complaints recorded between 2017 and 2021,” it writes.
Critics, including senior lawyers, pointed out the chapter’s selectivity: it singled out the judiciary for corruption without mentioning similar issues in other sectors like politics, bureaucracy, or the executive, creating an impression that graft was unique to the courts.
This addition was intended to educate 13- to 14-year-old students on real-world judicial hurdles, but it quickly drew accusations of being unbalanced and potentially damaging to the institution’s reputation.
Out of 2.25 lakh printed copies, only 38 had been sold before the backlash intensified, with NCERT swiftly halting further distribution.
How the Issue Came to Light: Timeline of Events
The textbook was released on February 24, 2026. The matter escalated rapidly the next day, February 25, when senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi urgently mentioned it before a Supreme Court. Sibal questioned, “What about politicians and leaders?” while Singhvi highlighted the selectivity, stating, “The selectivity, my lord. Corruption is there in other areas also.” On February 25, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, took suo motu cognizance, registering the case titled “In Re: Social Science Textbook for Grade-8 (Part 2) published by NCERT and ancillary issues”.
The CJI, acknowledging widespread concern including calls and messages from perturbed High Court judges, took suo motu cognizance, registering the case immediately.
By February 26, the court had issued show-cause notices under the Contempt of Courts Act to the Secretary of the Department of School Education and Literacy and NCERT Director Dr. Dinesh Prasad Saklani, demanding explanations for the content and potential contempt actions.
The bench also directed the Union government to remove all PDF copies available online and imposed a “complete blanket ban” on the book’s publication, printing, or digital dissemination, warning that any circumvention would be treated as contempt.
The matter is scheduled for further hearing around March 11.
NCERT responded by withdrawing the book from sale, taking it off its website, and initiating recalls. The matter is slated for a compliance report in two weeks and a full hearing in four weeks.
The Supreme Court’s Strong Rebuke: Key Statements and Actions
The court’s response was unusually vehement, reflecting deep institutional protectiveness. CJI Surya Kant described the chapter as a “calculated move to undermine institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary,” labeling it a “deep-rooted conspiracy” and stating, “I want to find out who is behind the publication of the chapter that mentions ‘corruption in judiciary’.” He emphasized, “I will not let anybody, no matter how high up they are, defame the institution,” and added, “We would like to have a deeper probe. We need to find who is responsible… Heads must roll! We will not close the case.”
The bench observed, “Judiciary is bleeding, they fired gunshots,” underscoring the perceived attack. However, the court clarified that its actions were not meant to stifle legitimate criticism.
The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, representing the government, tendered an unconditional apology and assured, “The Government of India stands with the judiciary and will take whatever action is desired by the apex court.” He also said that those who prepared the chapter “will not be associated with any future activities related to education or the Ministry.”
The court demanded records from NCERT, including:
•A comprehensive list of members of the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee who approved the chapter, with their details.
•Specific names, qualifications, and credentials of the Textbook Development Team responsible for drafting Chapter 4.
Government and NCERT’s Response: Apologies and Assurances
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan broke his silence on February 26, expressing deep regret: “We have the utmost respect for the judiciary. Whatever the judiciary has said, we will fully comply with it. I am deeply saddened by what has happened, and I express my regret.” He announced an internal investigation, stating, “Accountability will be fixed, action will be taken against those involved in drafting chapter on judicial corruption,” and promised, “We will ensure that such an error is not repeated ever in the future.”
NCERT issued a formal apology, admitting the chapter contained “certain inappropriate textual material and errors of judgment” not intended to defame any constitutional body. The council committed to rewriting the book in consultation with authorities and confirmed the section on judicial corruption would be dropped.
The National Council of Educational Research & Training (NCERT) holds the judiciary in highest esteem and considers it to be the upholder of the Indian Constitution and protector of Fundamental Rights. The aforesaid error is purely unintentional and NCERT regrets the inclusion of inappropriate material in the said chapter,” the NCERT said in the statement.
The NCERT said that the objective of the new textbook is to “strengthen constitutional literacy, institutional respect, and informed understanding of democratic participation amongst students”, adding that “there is no intent to question or diminish the authority of any constitutional body
This incident raises questions about balancing educational transparency with institutional respect. The court’s intervention highlights the sensitivity around portraying public institutions in school curricula, especially when perceived as selective or defamatory. It also underscores ongoing judicial challenges, such as backlogs and complaints, which the chapter aimed to address but executed poorly.
Politically, the Congress party supported the Supreme Court’s stance, alleging that textbook revisions over the past decade were “driven by the RSS and marked by mischief and malice.” The episode could prompt stricter oversight on curriculum development, ensuring factual accuracy without bias, and may influence future discussions on teaching civic issues to young students. As the probe unfolds, it will test the boundaries between educational reform and safeguarding democratic pillars.
The Supreme Court is set to examine the minutes of the Syllabi Board meetings to determine when, how, and why the passage was included in the textbook.
About the Author
