Supreme Court: Taking serious note of contents of a Grade-8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), a three-Judge Bench comprising the Surya Kant, CJI and Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ., initiated suo motu proceedings observing that educational material must maintain pedagogical balance and institutional responsibility. The Court ordered nationwide withdrawal of the book and issued contempt notices to education authorities.
The Court observed that the inclusion of material allegedly undermining the institutional dignity of the judiciary in a foundational school curriculum warranted a rigorous review of its pedagogical suitability and its potential impact on the institutional standing of the Judiciary as a whole. The Court noted,
“While the publication ostensibly dedicates an entire Chapter to the Role of Judiciary to our Society and washes off with one stroke of the pen, the illustrious history associated with the Supreme Court, the High Courts and the District Courts, it conspicuously omits the substantive contributions made by these institutions towards the preservation of our democratic fabric.”
Background of NCERT Class-8 textbook Judiciary Chapter Case
The proceedings arose after one Indian Express newspaper report dated 24-2-2026 highlighted Chapter 4 of the textbook titled “The Role of the Judiciary in our Society”, which includes a sub-topic “Corruption in the Judiciary” and referred to hundreds of complaints allegedly received against the judiciary, clearly indicating, as if no action was taken, picking a few words from the statement of a former Chief Justice of India, suggesting that the judiciary itself has acknowledged the lack of transparency, accountability and institutional corruption. The Court also noted that the “self-speaking” article published in the Indian Express declared that “people do experience corruption of various levels of the judiciary…”
When the Secretary General of the Supreme Court verified whether such a publication had indeed been released by NCERT, instead of displaying any introspection about what had been written in the book in a reckless, irresponsible, contemptuous, and motivated manner, the Director responded in writing, defending the contents of the book.
Pedagogical concerns
While acknowledging that criticism and public discourse are essential features of a democracy, the Bench clarified that the present proceedings were not intended to suppress legitimate critique, but to examine the pedagogical propriety of material introduced in school education.
However, on a prima facie examination of the book’s contents, when read in conjunction with the administrative response received from the Director, NCERT, the Court observed that it revealed 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 Court noted that while the chapter allegedly highlights the complaints against the judiciary, it fails to acknowledge the imperative role the Judiciary undertakes in upholding Constitutional Morality and the Basic Structure Doctrine, principles that constitute the very lifeblood of the Indian citizens in public existence
“This silence and the uninhibited criticism are particularly egregious when viewed in light of the sheer volume of high-ranking officials who have been censured by this very Court in the past for corrupt practices, fraudulent activities and for illicit siphoning of public funds, etc. It seems to us that the choice of words and expressions in the book may not be a simpliciter inadvertent or bona fide error.”
Risk of erosion of institutional confidence
The Bench remarked that embedding decontextualised narratives within a nationwide middle-school curriculum risked eroding public faith in judicial institutions, particularly among impressionable young learners.
“Young students in their formative years are only beginning to navigate the nuances of public life and the constitutional architecture that sustains it. It is fundamentally improper to expose them to a biased narrative that may engender permanent misconceptions at an age when they lack the perspicacity to appreciate the manifold and onerous responsibilities that are discharged by the judiciary on a day-to-day basis.”
Hence, given these serious consequences and the everlasting impact it may have on the independence and autonomy of the judiciary, such a misconduct would fall within the definition of ‘criminal contempt’ under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as if proved to be a deliberate move, it will undoubtedly amount to impeding the dignity of the institution and interfering with the administration of justice, besides scandalizing the institution.
Developments noted by Court
The Court took note of a press release stating that the Ministry of Education had directed suspension of distribution of the textbook, that the concerned chapter would be rewritten, and that an apology had been tendered. The Bench, however, observed that 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, will be considered at an appropriate stage.
Directions issued
-
Show-cause notices issued to the Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Education, and the Director, NCERT, to explain why action under contempt or other penal laws should not be initiated.
-
Pending further consideration, the Court ordered:
-
Immediate seizure and removal of all physical and digital copies of the textbook, presently in circulation, including those held in storage, retail outlets, or educational institutions, from circulation;
-
Removal of the book from all physical and digital platforms and educational institutions;
-
Personal responsibility of the NCERT Director and school principals to ensure compliance and submission of compliance affidavits by Union and State authorities within 2 weeks;
-
A blanket prohibition on further publication, reprinting, or dissemination of the textbook in any form.
-
Director, NCERT directed to submit:
(a) A comprehensive list and details pertaining to members of the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee, who approved the offending chapter;
(b) The specific names and credentials of the Textbook Development Team responsible for drafting Chapter No.4; and
(c) The original records of the minutes of all meetings, where the offending chapter was deliberated and finalised, shall be produced on the next date of hearing
The matter has been listed for further consideration on 11 March 2026.
[IN RE: SOCIAL SCIENCE TEXTBOOK FOR GRADE — 8 (PART-2) PUBLISHED BY NCERT AND ANCILLARY ISSUES, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 318, order dated 26-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General; Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv.; Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Adv.; Mr. Naman Sherstra, Adv.; Dr. Vivek Sharma, Adv.
