Chapter on judicial corruption: NCERT faces SC ire, pulls Class 8 textbook

The Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of objectionable references to judicial corruption in an NCERT Class 8 textbook, prompting the council to withdraw the book from its website after strong remarks by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant

New Delhi: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday strongly objected to a chapter on judicial corruption in the NCERT‘s Class 8 social science curriculum, prompting the syllabus-setting body to withdraw the contentious textbook from its website.

A three-judge bench comprising the CJI and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi took suo motu cognizance of the “objectionable” statements about the judiciary in the new textbook after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, alongside Abhishek Singhvi, mentioned the matter for urgent consideration.

---

The NCERT (National Council of Educational Research and Training) social science textbook for Class 8 says corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and the lack of an adequate number of judges are among the challenges faced by the judicial system.

After stern words by the Supreme Court that it will not allow “anyone on earth” to tarnish the judiciary’s integrity, the NCERT pulled the textbook from its website, with sources saying the government was livid with the controversial references in the curriculum.

The council, responsible for school education curriculum, is also considering the removal of the controversial portions from the books already printed, sources said. Several schools in the national capital, however, said they had no directive yet about whether or not to teach the portions in question.

The NCERT is said to have called an internal meeting to review the recommendations of the subject experts involved in the chapter and the officials who approved it.

NCERT Chairman Dinesh Prasad Saklani did not respond to calls and messages on the issue. Another top official at the council refused to comment, saying the matter was sub judice.

The government sources said while the NCERT is an autonomous body, the officials responsible for adding chapters should have applied their minds. If the issue of corruption was to be included in the textbook, it should have been about all three organs (the executive, the legislature and the judiciary), they said.

“We are very disturbed as members of this institution to find that children of Class 8 are being taught about corruption in the judiciary. It is part of the NCERT book. We have great stake in the institution… it (the chapter) is entirely scandalous. We have the copies of the book,” Sibal said in court.

“I can assure you all that I am fully aware of this,” the CJI said, adding that he received various calls and messages and many high court judges were “perturbed”.

When Sibal said he hoped the bench would take suo motu cognizance, the CJI said, “Wait for a day. This is definitely concerning the entire institution. The bar and the bench are perturbed. Every stakeholder in the system is really perturbed. I am receiving a lot of calls and messages. There are judges of the high courts who are perturbed.” The CJI told Sibal he had already passed an order taking suo motu cognizance of the issue.

“I will not allow anyone on earth to taint the integrity of the institution and defame the institution. At any cost, I will not permit it. Howsoever high it may be, the law will take its course. I know how to deal with it,” a visibly irked CJI said.

Singhvi raised the issue of the NCERT adopting a selective approach and said it presumed that “there was no corruption elsewhere. There was not a word about corruption in bureaucracy, politics, public life and other institutions”. “It seems to be a very calculated and deep-rooted measure to… we don’t want to say anything more… I am aware and I have done my duty,” the CJI said and thanked the lawyers for raising the issue.

Justice Bagchi referred to the basic structure doctrine and said “constitutional integrity to the basic structure is missing in the contents of the textbook”.

The book pegs the approximate number of pending cases in the Supreme Court at 81,000, in high courts at 62.40 lakh, and in district and subordinate courts at 4.70 crore.

It highlights the judiciary’s internal accountability mechanisms and refers to the established procedure for receiving complaints through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System.

According to the book, over 1,600 complaints were received through this mechanism between 2017 and 2021.

The textbook also quotes former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, who in July 2025 said that instances of corruption and misconduct within the judiciary had a negative impact on public confidence.

“However, the path to rebuilding this trust lies in the swift, decisive and transparent action taken to address and resolve these issues… Transparency and accountability are democratic virtues,” he is quoted as saying in the book.

The government sources said that data on corruption in the judiciary was available in parliamentary records and the national judicial data grid, but the Union Law Ministry was not consulted for cross-verification of the fact.

The sources also said former CJI Gavai’s quote on corruption in the judiciary was taken out of context, and he is learnt to be unhappy over it.

“If students are to be taught about corruption, the chapter should have ideally encouraged them to file a graft complaint, but not single out one institution.

“An in-house mechanism already exists in the Supreme Court and the 25 high courts to deal with complaints of corruption against judges. As per the drafters of the constitution, the judiciary is an independent institution which is capable of dealing with such cases,” a government functionary said.

Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal told the Lok Sabha earlier this month that 8,639 complaints were received against sitting judges between 2016 and 2025. The highest number of complaints (1,170) was received in 2024 by the office of the CJI against sitting judges.

Former law minister Ashwani Kumar hailed CJI Surya Kant for taking suo motu cognisance of the chapter and said the prompt action would help bury the propaganda against the judiciary.