NCERT pulls Class 8 Social Science book after SC highlights judicial corruption chapter

 The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has decided not to sell the newly launched Class 8 Social Science book after a part about corruption in judiciary became a subject of harsh reaction in the Supreme Court.

The matter was raised after a few hours before a Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, who took a very serious view of the matter and suo motu proceedings were ordered. CJI observed that the court will not allow any move to defame the judiciary, implying that it is a matter that concerns the whole judiciary, both the Bar and the Bench.

“I am fully aware of it. We will wait for a day. This definitely concerns the entire institution. I am getting a lot of calls and messages. I am taking suo motu cognisance. I will not let anybody, no matter how high up they are, defame the institution,” CJI Kant observed in court.

The issue was brought up by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi who stated that the text of the book seemed to single out the judiciary while not mentioning the corruption in other sectors such as politics and bureaucracy. They argued that by isolating the problem, a distorted view was given to the young students.

Sources revealed that NCERT has withdrawn the textbooks from the market and is re, examining the material. The contentious paragraph was allegedly a part of a chapter on the judiciary's role and the discussion of the problems of the judiciary of the backlog of cases, the mechanisms for the accountability of the judges, and the instances of corruption which are said to have been reported.

The Supreme Court's move to take suo motu cognizance signifies the sensitivity of the issue of institutional integrity and the framework of civic education. NCERT will probably change the material after getting advice.

This incident has sparked the discussion again of how the constitutional institutions should be presented in the school syllabus and the extent to which the students' right to questioning should be balanced by the respect for the institution in the classrooms.