References to “corruption at various levels of the judiciary” will be removed from the Class 8 Social Science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), senior government sources said on Wednesday.
According to sources, the section “should not have been written”, describing the inclusion as “not appropriate”. They added that “inspirational things” ought to have been highlighted instead.
`
The move comes shortly after the Supreme Court of India expressed “grave concern” over the chapter.
Chief Justice Surya Kant observed that members of the judiciary, including High Court judges, were “perturbed” by the reference.
“I will not allow anybody to defame the institution. Law will take its course,” the Chief Justice said, adding that he had taken cognisance of the issue and may initiate suo motu action.
Sources also indicated that quoting former Chief Justice BR Gavai in this context “is not right” and “not appropriate”.
What the Textbook Said
The revised chapter, titled “Role of the Judiciary in Our Society”, moved beyond explaining court hierarchy and access to justice. It discussed challenges such as corruption and judicial backlogs.
MUST READ: ‘Will not allow anybody to defame institution’: CJI seethes over NCERT’s corruption in judiciary chapter
The textbook quoted a July 2025 remark by BR Gavai, stating: “… the path to rebuilding this trust lies in swift, decisive and transparent action taken to address and resolve these issues… Transparency and accountability are democratic virtues.”
The chapter also explained that judges are bound by a code of conduct governing behaviour both inside and outside courtrooms. Additionally, it highlighted internal accountability mechanisms and efforts at the Union and state levels to enhance transparency through technology and disciplinary action where required.
Objections Raised by Senior Lawyers
The issue was flagged in court by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who described the inclusion as a matter of “grave concern”.
In an earlier post on X, Sibal questioned why alleged corruption in other institutions was not similarly addressed.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi also raised objections, remarking in court: “The selectivity my lord. The selectivity… It is there in other areas also but judicial corruption.”
The controversy follows recent data shared by the Ministry of Law and Justice, which informed Parliament that 7,528 complaints were received against sitting judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts between 2016 and 2025. The ministry clarified that such complaints are examined through the judiciary’s in-house mechanism.
Diverging Legal Opinions
Senior lawyer Sidhart Luthra argued that school-level education should focus on foundational civic understanding rather than contentious institutional issues.
Meanwhile, Supreme Court lawyer Pragya Parijat Singh said mentioning corruption without critical analysis of the judiciary’s broader role in strengthening Indian democracy reflected a lack of contextual balance.
