SC closes suo motu case over NCERT textbook chapter on judiciary

The Supreme Court of India has closed suo motu proceedings related to a controversial chapter in the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) Class 8 social science textbook, which discussed corruption in the judiciary. This decision follows confirmation that the contentious chapter has been removed and replaced with revised content. The court’s action comes after the government informed it that the updated version of the textbook is already in circulation. The bench, consisting of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, heard arguments regarding the chapter that had sparked widespread debate. The chapter had drawn criticism for allegedly portraying the judiciary in a negative light, prompting the court to initiate suo motu proceedings. The court had previously issued orders directing the Central government and states to distance themselves from three academicians, Professor Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar, and Alok Prasanna Kumar, who were involved in drafting the chapter. In its latest hearing, the court noted that the revised chapter, prepared under the guidance of an expert panel formed by the Centre, has been implemented. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta confirmed to the court that the updated textbooks containing the new chapter are currently available. The court also clarified that a statement in its earlier order, which mentioned that the curriculum had not been presented to the committee at all levels, was merely the submission of Mehta and did not constitute a judicial observation or ruling. This clarification followed concerns raised by senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing one of the academicians, who warned that misinterpretation of the court’s remarks could harm the reputations of the affected scholars. Datar emphasized that the statements should not be taken as findings against the individuals involved. The court had initially modified its March 11 order, which had instructed the Centre, states, and other entities to disassociate from the three academicians. It had allowed these bodies to independently decide whether to continue associating with the experts, without being influenced by the court’s previous observations. The March 11 order had also stated that the three academicians had “deliberately and knowingly” misrepresented facts to create a negative impression of the judiciary among students. However, the three academicians had argued that the content was developed collectively and not solely by any one person. They maintained that the revision process involved multiple stakeholders and that no individual had exclusive authority over the drafting of the material. The court acknowledged this argument and reiterated that its comments pertained to the content rather than the individuals involved. The controversy surrounding the textbook began in February when the Supreme Court imposed a blanket ban on the publication, reprinting, or digital distribution of the NCERT Class 8 social science textbook. The court described the situation as having “fired a gunshot,” causing the judiciary to “bleed.” This directive followed growing concerns about the portrayal of the judiciary in the textbook, particularly the chapter on corruption. The court had also mandated the formation of a committee of domain experts within a week to finalize the curriculum for NCERT’s legal studies, not only for Class 8 but also for higher grades. This move aimed to ensure that future educational materials would reflect a balanced and accurate representation of the judiciary. As the suo motu proceedings conclude, the focus shifts to the implementation of the revised curriculum and the ongoing role of the newly constituted expert committee. The court’s decision marks a resolution to the immediate controversy, though the broader implications for educational content and judicial accountability remain under scrutiny. The revised textbooks are now in circulation, signaling the end of the current phase of legal intervention into the matter.