NCERT Withdraws Textbook After Supreme Court Flags Judiciary Corruption Chapter
Centre Issues Apology, Book to Be Rewritten
New Delhi, Feb 26, KNT: The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has apologized and pulled back a Class 8 social science textbook after the Supreme Court of India took strong exception to a chapter that referred to “corruption in the judiciary” and structural challenges faced by courts.
The controversial chapter was part of the newly introduced textbook on the role of the judiciary and included references to corruption and backlogs of cases as areas of concern. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, described the inclusion as problematic and expressed strong displeasure, saying it could undermine public confidence in the judicial system. The apex court said it would not allow any attempt to defame or question the integrity of the judiciary and took suo motu cognizance of the matter.
Following the apex court’s remarks, NCERT issued a statement acknowledging that “inappropriate textual material and an error of judgment” had crept into the chapter and said the book’s distribution had been halted. It said the content would be rewritten in consultation with appropriate authorities and made available ahead of the new academic session. The council emphasised its respect for the judiciary and said the controversial inclusion was unintentional.
The Centre also issued an apology in the Supreme Court, stating that those responsible for drafting the chapter would face consequences and would not be involved in future textbook development.
This episode highlights the sensitivity around how key constitutional institutions are portrayed in educational material. It also underscores that even constructive analysis and critical discussion can become untenable if powerful institutions perceive them as undermining their stature.
No individual or institution on this planet is infallible, and the NCERT controversy shows how power dynamics can determine what remains in public discourse and what gets buried. The development suggests that in matters where institutional prestige is involved, even well-intended criticism may be reined in when confronted by authority. [KNT]
