Supreme Court of India takes suo motu cognisance of NCERT class 8 textbook’s ‘judicial corruption’ content

by · Greater Kashmir

New Delhi, Feb 25: The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday voiced strong objection to portions of a new Class 8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) that refer to “corruption in the judiciary”. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said the court had taken suo motu cognisance of the issue, indicating that it would examine the matter on its own.

“The bar and the bench are perturbed. All High Court judges are perturbed. I will take up the matter suo motu. I will not allow anybody to defame the institution. Law will take its course,” the CJI said in open court. Justice Joymalya Bagchi termed the content an attack on the Constitution’s basic structure. “The book seems to go against the basic structure itself,” he observed.

According to a report in The Indian Express, the Class 8 textbook includes a section on “corruption in the judiciary” within a chapter titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society”. The chapter reportedly lists “corruption at various levels of the judiciary” and highlights the “massive backlog of cases” due to factors such as an inadequate number of judges, complex legal procedures and poor infrastructure among the challenges facing the judicial system.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal brought the matter to the court’s attention. “NCERT is teaching Class 8 students about judicial corruption. This is a matter of grave concern. We are here for the bar,” he said. Responding, the CJI stated that he had already acted in his capacity as head of the institution. “As head of the institution, I have done my duty and I have taken cognisance. This seems to be a calculated move. I won’t say much,” Justice Kant remarked.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi also criticised the textbook content, questioning what he described as selective emphasis. “The selectivity, my lord. The selectivity… it is there in other areas also, but judicial corruption!” Singhvi submitted.