Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

On NCERT books, Chief Justice Surya Kant’s anger is justified

February 27, 2026 5 min read Polity & Governance Social Issues GS2
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • The Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, ordered the immediate withdrawal of all physical and digital copies of NCERT's Class 8 Social Science textbook "Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Vol II" (First Edition) after a chapter titled "The Role of Judiciary in our Society" contained material deemed inappropriate.
  • The court issued show cause notices to the Secretary, Department of School Education and to a senior NCERT official, asking why action under the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated.
  • Three named individuals — a visiting professor, an educator, and a legal researcher — were barred from any assignment involving public funds across all central government, state government, university, and publicly funded institutions.
  • The Central Government informed the court that an expert committee comprising former SC Justice Indu Malhotra, Justice Aniruddha Bose (National Judicial Academy), and senior advocate K.K. Venugopal had been constituted to revise the chapter.
  • NCERT had acknowledged in a press release that "inappropriate textual material" had "inadvertently appeared" in Chapter 4 of the textbook.

Static Topic Bridges

Contempt of Court: Constitutional and Statutory Framework

The power to punish for contempt is a fundamental attribute of every court of record in India. Article 129 of the Constitution declares the Supreme Court to be a court of record and grants it the power to punish for contempt of itself. Article 215 confers a parallel power on High Courts. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 provides the statutory framework for classifying, defining, and procedurally governing contempt proceedings.

  • Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines two types: (i) Civil contempt — willful disobedience to any court order, judgment, or decree; (ii) Criminal contempt — any publication or action that scandalizes or tends to lower the authority of any court, prejudices a fair trial, or interferes with the administration of justice.
  • Section 12 prescribes maximum punishment: six months' imprisonment, or fine up to ₹2,000, or both.
  • The Supreme Court has clarified (Baradakanta Mishra v. Registrar of Orissa High Court, 1974) that Article 129 is an inherent constitutional power not limited by the 1971 Act.
  • An important safeguard: Section 13 of the 1971 Act provides that no court shall impose sentence for contempt unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes with the due course of justice.
  • The 1971 Act added "truth" as a defense (2006 amendment): Section 13(b) allows truth as a valid defense if it is in public interest and the request for invoking the said defence is bona fide.

Connection to this news: The Supreme Court's show cause notices invoking the Contempt of Courts Act signal that publishing educational material misrepresenting the judiciary's role could constitute criminal contempt — specifically, material tending to "scandalize or lower the authority of any court."

NCERT and the Constitutional Right to Education

The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) was established in 1961 as an autonomous organization under the Ministry of Education to assist and advise the Central and State governments on policies related to school education. NCERT textbooks serve as the standard reference material for CBSE-affiliated schools and the foundation for competitive examinations including UPSC CSE.

  • Article 21A of the Constitution (inserted by the 86th Constitutional Amendment, 2002) provides the Right to Education as a fundamental right for children between 6 and 14 years.
  • The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act) operationalizes Article 21A and includes provisions on curriculum quality and standards.
  • Section 29 of RTE Act empowers academic authorities (like NCERT) to lay down curriculum and evaluation procedures.
  • NCERT's National Curriculum Framework (NCF) guides textbook development; the NCF 2023 was the basis for the new "Exploring Society" series.
  • NCERT textbooks are protected under copyright but are mandated to be made freely available digitally (NCERT e-pathshala).

Connection to this news: The controversy directly implicates NCERT's institutional role as the standard-setter for school curriculum. The Supreme Court's direction to constitute an expert committee to vet the revised chapter is an extraordinary judicial intervention in the academic domain, raising questions about the boundary between judicial oversight and academic autonomy.

Judicial Independence as a Basic Structure Doctrine

The independence of the judiciary has been recognized as a basic feature of the Constitution by the Supreme Court, making it unamendable even by Parliament. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) established the Basic Structure doctrine. Subsequent cases — including the Second Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993) and the Third Judges Case (1998) — specifically identified judicial independence as inviolable.

  • The Basic Structure doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973) holds that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a manner that destroys its essential features.
  • Second Judges Case (1993): Established the collegium system for appointment of judges, holding that judicial primacy in appointments is integral to judicial independence.
  • The separation of powers — with an independent judiciary as the third pillar — is a structural feature recognized since the Constitution's inception.
  • Misrepresenting judicial independence in educational material would be constitutionally significant, as it directly concerns the foundational values embedded in the Constitution.
  • CJI Surya Kant was sworn in as the 52nd Chief Justice of India on November 9, 2024, succeeding CJI D.Y. Chandrachud.

Connection to this news: Any textbook chapter that distorts the nature, role, or integrity of the judiciary in a manner that "tends to scandalize" it strikes at the concept of judicial independence embedded in the Basic Structure. The court's strong reaction reflects the sensitivity of this institutional boundary.

Key Facts & Data

  • Textbook in question: "Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Vol II" — Chapter 4: "The Role of Judiciary in our Society" (NCERT, Class 8).
  • Three individuals barred: Michel Danino (visiting professor), Suparna Diwakar (educator), Alok Prasanna Kumar (legal researcher).
  • Expert revision committee: former SC Justice Indu Malhotra, Justice Aniruddha Bose (NJA), and senior advocate K.K. Venugopal.
  • Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: maximum punishment — 6 months imprisonment or ₹2,000 fine or both.
  • Article 129: Supreme Court as court of record with power to punish contempt.
  • CJI Surya Kant: 52nd Chief Justice of India (sworn in November 9, 2024).
  • NCERT was established: November 1, 1961.