Supreme Court ‘Disturbed’ by NCERT’s ‘Duly Rewritten’ Chapter on Judicial Corruption

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court expressed its disappointment with the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) over a controversial chapter on judicial corruption in the Class 8 Social Sciences textbook. While the NCERT claimed the chapter has been ‘duly rewritten’ and will be included in the 2026–27 curriculum. The Court, however, found this explanation unsatisfactory.

The apex court had earlier expressed strong objection against the chapter in a suo motu case, which prompted NCERT to rewrite the chapter.

“No sufficient expertise”: says SC

The NCERT Director, Professor Dinesh Prasad Saklani, revealed that the chapter had been rewritten in an affidavit to the Court which came after the Director was ordered to explain why he shouldn't face criminal charges for contempt of court.

However, the Supreme Court was displeased because the Director’s statement failed to identify the "domain experts" who supposedly rewrote and approved the new content.

After the Court voiced its concerns, India’s Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, stepped in to offer a guarantee. He promised that the chapter would not be printed until it underwent a rigorous review by a high-level committee formed by the Central Government.

A Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, then issued a formal order. They instructed the government to put together a team of experts to oversee the revisions. The Court specifically requested that this group include a former judge, an academician, and a practising lawyer. The chapter is not to be published without the approval of this committee.

The NCERT Director's statement further revealed the individuals who developed the chapter, which includes visiting professor Michel Danino, with contributions from Suparna Diwakar and Alok Prasanna Kumar.

Ovrsight on NSTMC's part?

Standard procedure requires any new chapter to be formally approved by the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee (NSTMC). However, in this instance, the proper review process appears to have been bypassed with the chapter only being sent digitally to a few select members rather than undergoing a full committee evaluation.

The Court noted that the individuals involved lacked sufficient expertise regarding the judicial system and issued a stern directive that they are to have no further involvement in any other projects.

“At the outset, we have no reason to doubt that Professor Michel Danino, along with Ms Diwakar and Mr Alok Prasanna Kumar, either does not have reasonable knowledge about the Indian judiciary or they deliberately and knowingly misrepresented the facts in order to project a negative image of the Indian judiciary before students of class 8 who are at an impressionable age. There is no reason why such persons be associated in any manner with the preparation of curriculum or finalisation of textbooks for the next generation. We direct the Government of India and all states/UTs/Universities etc. to disassociate 3 of them forthwith and not to assign any responsibility which involves public funds. This order shall be subject to their approaching this court for modification with an explanation,” the court noted.

The Court also ordered the Union government to re-evaluate the membership of the National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee (NSTMC). Specifically, the Court wants a review of the members who were originally shown the controversial chapter, questioning the judgment of those who allowed the process to move forward.

Presently, the court has imposed a blanket ban on the book carrying the chapter with an order to seize all the physical copies and a takedown of the same in digital formats. 

Also Read: Mumbai: Man Attempted Self-Immolation Outside Maharashtra Vidhan Bhavan