The Supreme Court on Thursday issued show cause notices to the Secretary of the Department of School Education and to Dr. Dinesh Prasad in a suo motu case concerning an NCERT social science textbook chapter on the judiciary, observing that the contents could amount to criminal contempt if found to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the institution.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant said the Court would examine whether the apology conveyed through a press release was genuine or merely an attempt to avoid consequences after “substantial irreversible damage” had already been caused. The Court warned that the material, if proven to be intentional, would interfere with the administration of justice and “scandalise the institution.”
Court Flags Impact on Students and Public Perception
The bench noted that the textbook, intended for school students, would not remain confined to classrooms but would influence teachers, parents and society at large. It expressed concern that exposing young students to what it termed a “biased narrative” at a formative stage could create “fundamental misconceptions” about the judiciary.
The Court clarified that the proceedings were not meant to suppress legitimate criticism but to protect the integrity of education and institutional understanding. It emphasised that rigorous public discourse strengthens institutions, but the material in question appeared to omit the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional principles, including the basic structure doctrine and access to justice through legal aid.
Concerns Over Selective Portrayal and Allegations of Corruption
According to the bench, the chapter titled “Role of Judiciary in Our Society” highlighted allegations of corruption and pendency without reflecting corrective measures, accountability mechanisms or the judiciary’s constitutional functions. The Court said the text suggested that complaints against judges had gone unaddressed and relied on selective references, creating an impression of systemic corruption.
The bench observed that such a portrayal, particularly in foundational curriculum material, warranted “rigorous review” because of its potential to erode public confidence and the dignity of judicial office.
Halt on Distribution, Digital Content Under Scrutiny
The Court took note of a press release stating that the Department of School Education had halted distribution of the textbook. However, it indicated that digital circulation was a matter of concern and that further steps, including possible takedown directions, would be considered.
The bench said it would conduct a deeper probe to identify those responsible for drafting and approving the chapters, making it clear that accountability would not be limited to lower-level authors.
Possible Contempt Proceedings
Issuing notices, the Court asked why action under the Contempt of Courts Act or other applicable laws should not be initiated against the officials involved or those responsible for the “offending chapters.” It observed that any deliberate attempt to undermine judicial independence could fall within the scope of criminal contempt.
The matter will be taken up for further consideration at a later stage as the Court examines responsibility for the publication and the adequacy of corrective measures.
