Preparations are reportedly underway to revise portions of a Class 8 social science textbook published by the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) after content discussing “corruption in the judiciary” sparked significant controversy. According to senior government sources, officials believe the section dealing with the judicial system presented an imbalanced perspective, placing disproportionate emphasis on negative aspects while failing to provide equal discussion of other democratic institutions such as the legislature and executive.
The development follows sharp observations from a Supreme Court Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, who described the issue as a “deep-rooted” concern and stressed that the integrity of the judiciary could not be allowed to be undermined or publicly questioned. The remarks came amid growing unease within judicial circles, with reports indicating that several judges and senior legal professionals had expressed apprehension about how the subject was being presented to school students.
Sources indicated that the textbook chapter focused heavily on issues such as judicial backlog and allegations of corruption, which officials fear could create a distorted understanding among young learners still forming their views about constitutional institutions. Authorities have argued that if the goal of the chapter was to educate students about India’s governance framework, then the functioning, challenges and accountability mechanisms of all branches of government should have been discussed with comparable depth and balance.
Concerns were also raised over references made to Justice Gavai within the chapter, with officials suggesting that selective quotations may convey unintended impressions about the judiciary’s credibility. These references, according to sources, were considered inappropriate within the educational context and contributed to the demand for a review of the content.
The controversy gained momentum after senior advocate Kapil Sibal brought the issue before the Supreme Court, stating that many senior members of the legal fraternity were deeply disturbed by the inclusion of “judicial corruption” as a theme in a school-level textbook. Responding to the submission, Chief Justice Surya Kant noted that he had already received numerous calls and messages, including concerns conveyed by High Court judges, reflecting widespread anxiety within the judiciary.
Taking a firm stance, the Chief Justice stated that the court would not permit any attempt to defame or weaken public confidence in the judicial institution. He emphasised that appropriate action would be taken regardless of how far the matter progressed, signalling the seriousness with which the judiciary views challenges to its institutional credibility. There is also speculation that the Supreme Court could take suo motu cognisance of the issue and examine it formally.
At the centre of the dispute is a revised Class 8 social science textbook chapter titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society,” which discusses structural challenges faced by Indian courts. The chapter highlights the scale of pending litigation, noting that the Supreme Court has around 81,000 pending cases, High Courts collectively face more than six million pending matters, and subordinate courts are burdened with over 40 million cases. It attributes these backlogs to factors such as shortages of judges, procedural delays and infrastructural limitations while also discussing how corruption allegations can affect public trust.
The controversy has also revived broader debates about the relationship between the executive and judiciary, particularly disagreements over judicial appointments. Tensions in this area date back to 2015, when the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act passed by Parliament, thereby restoring the collegium system. Critics of the current arrangement have argued that judicial appointments should involve a broader institutional framework, while supporters maintain that judicial independence must remain protected.
With the textbook now under review and judicial scrutiny intensifying, the episode has evolved into a wider discussion about how sensitive institutional issues should be presented in educational material, especially when aimed at young students, while balancing transparency, critical learning and respect for constitutional institutions.
