- 29 minutes ago
The Supreme Court has banned the NCERT's Class 8 Political Science textbook over a chapter containing references to judicial corruption.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00But our top story tonight comes from the Supreme Court which has banned the NCRT's Class 8 political science textbook
00:08over a chapter that contained references to judicial corruption.
00:13The Chief Justice of India today called it an attempt to undermine the judiciary.
00:17Copies are to be seized, teaching, barred, show cause notices issued to the centre and the NCRT chief.
00:24While NCRT has withdrawn the book and apologised, the CGI has said the apology was inadequate.
00:31The move has again sparked a debate.
00:33Is the judiciary beyond criticism?
00:35Was the reaction of the justices disproportionate?
00:40Or should the writing of textbooks be much more careful?
00:44That's our top focus tonight.
00:45But first, take a look at what happened in the Apex Court.
00:51The Supreme Court on Thursday banned the NCRT's latest political science textbook for Class 8,
00:57calling the contents of one chapter a calculated attempt to erode the credibility and prestige of the judiciary.
01:05A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joy Malabakchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi
01:12ordered the immediate removal of the chapter from all physical and digital platforms.
01:17It directed authorities to seize printed copies already in circulation.
01:21The court barred any teaching from the book.
01:24It imposed a blanket prohibition on its production and distribution
01:28and issued a show cause notice to the centre and the NCRT chief seeking an explanation.
01:34When the hearing began, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court
01:38that the NCRT has already withdrawn the textbook and apologised.
01:42But the CGI observed that the statement issued by the NCRT did not contain any apology.
01:48At the heart of the controversy is a chapter that referred to corruption at various levels of the judiciary,
01:55warned that such corruption can weaken access to justice,
01:58stated that misconduct cases have dented public confidence,
02:02flagged massive case backlogs across courts,
02:05and noted that instances of corruption within the judiciary have surfaced in the past.
02:11After sharp observations from the Supreme Court,
02:15the Union Education Minister expressed regret.
02:38The Supreme Court sweeping ban has ignited a larger constitutional debate.
02:43One group argues that this is an attempt to discredit and weaken a key constitutional institution.
02:50Critics question whether the court has shown equal urgency
02:53in responding to earlier controversies involving textbooks' revisions.
02:58Bureau Report, India Today.
03:03Well, let's ask some direct questions.
03:05Is this really a bit to malign the judiciary as the chief justice claim?
03:09Is it an oversight or a conspiracy as the judges claim?
03:13Has the Supreme Court overreacted because the issue is close to their bone?
03:17Is the content inappropriate for school kids?
03:20Or is the judiciary simply above criticism in this country?
03:23I'm joined by a special guest.
03:24My first guest, Indira Jai Singh, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court and a former ASG.
03:29Justice Sanjee Banerjee, former Chief Justice of Meghalaya and of Madras of Chennai.
03:35And Brinda Saroop, former Special Secretary, Department of Education and Literacy.
03:40I appreciate all of you joining us.
03:41I want to come to you, Indira Jai Singh, first.
03:43Because all your life, you have fought against judicial corruption.
03:47You have been the one among the few who have put a mirror to judicial corruption.
03:51Now, what happens? It's mentioned in a school textbook.
03:54What's the immediate reaction of the courts?
03:56It's a conspiracy to undermine the judiciary.
04:00Do you believe the judges have overreacted?
04:02Or do you believe that school textbooks should not be referring to judicial corruption?
04:08Rajdeep, as I said elsewhere, and as you point out,
04:12I frankly don't know whether to laugh or cry at what's going on.
04:16Am I being pushed into a situation where I have to defend the judiciary?
04:21Or are we going to look at these issues very honestly and frankly?
04:26Now, it is not my case that there has never been any corruption in the judiciary
04:31or that there will not be in the future.
04:34The only question is, do we have systems in place to deal with it in a transparent manner?
04:42Now, the answer to that question is no.
04:46There are systems to deal with it, but I'm afraid they're not very transparent in the manner in which they
04:51function.
04:52I believe that these processes should include members from the public.
04:59They should include members from the media.
05:02I believe that it's time the judiciary had a free and frank open town hall type of meeting
05:09with members of the general public, with members of the press, with members of the bar,
05:15with members of the judiciary, where these issues can be discussed.
05:18And we come to a solution, what best methodology we can find to address the issue of corruption.
05:25On the question of motivated...
05:27No, but do you believe that?
05:28Do you believe, therefore, it's a conspiracy?
05:30Ma'am, do you believe it's a conspiracy?
05:31These are the words used by the Chief Justice to undermine public faith in the judiciary.
05:37The truth of the matter is, there have been...
05:40These are whispers in the corridors of the judiciary, of courtrooms, about corruption in the judiciary.
05:45Are we saying our children are not to be exposed to any of it?
05:50Rajdeep, the court has not used the word, quote-unquote, conspiracy.
05:55What they do say is, we want to look into the motivation of what has happened.
06:01I want to tell you something very important.
06:03First and foremost, the opening sentences of the order say it all.
06:08The three arms of governance, the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary are co-equal,
06:15and the judiciary's independence must be safeguarded, okay, if we want a democratic society,
06:22if citizens need relief.
06:24So I agree with the fact that the court has taken Suomoto notice of this case.
06:29I also think that there is a motivation at play which needs to be exposed.
06:35The reason I say this is, this is not the first time this has happened.
06:39The NCERT is under the direct control of the executive.
06:44In fact, on your own show, you showed us a statement by the Minister for Education,
06:49who must take responsibility for what has happened with this textbook.
06:53Okay, it's not enough to have a fall guy like the director of the NCERT, okay?
06:59No, no, but ma'am, I'm sorry.
07:01For once, I must, ma'am, for once, I must push you.
07:04You seem to suggest that the executive, no, no, ma'am.
07:06You seem to be suggesting this is a conspiracy of the executive against the judiciary.
07:11Now, are we saying school textbooks will not refer to what is now being quoted?
07:17Justice B.R. Gawai, he is quoted in the book.
07:19He said in July 2025, there have been instances of corruption and misconduct
07:23that have surfaced even within the judiciary.
07:25Now, if the book quotes this, what is the, do judges have such a thin skin?
07:30No, they don't.
07:31And if the quotation was within context where it could have highlighted
07:36that Justice Gawai also said we had systems to deal with it.
07:40It was not.
07:41Please let me complete my earlier point.
07:43This is not the first time we are seeing something like this.
07:46Former Honourable Minister Mr. Rejuju has consistently attacked the judiciary.
07:51After that, we saw the former Honourable Vice President of India
07:55who also consistently attacked the judiciary.
07:58And now we have this textbook.
07:59Please see it in that context.
08:01It is not my case that there is no corruption.
08:04Justice Verma's case is testimony to the fact that Parliament has seized of the issue.
08:09Nor is it my case that the general public should not be informed.
08:13Nor is it my case that students should not be informed about it.
08:16But these are students who are going to go to law college.
08:19These are students who are going to become judges.
08:21Tell them.
08:22Be frank.
08:23Be upfront with them.
08:25Tell them what this issue really is.
08:29I would like students to demand transparency as I do.
08:32And I have to say that I am disappointed with the bar.
08:36Yes, we stood up today and asked for this.
08:38But when these attacks were going on, what did the bar do?
08:42Did the bar do anything?
08:43I didn't see the bar doing anything.
08:45I think we need to look a little more closely at the role of the bar as well.
08:49No, no, you are making a very serious allegation, ma'am, on the show.
08:52You are saying this is part of a concerted attack by the executive on the judiciary.
08:57I believe that to be true.
09:00I can't.
09:01I mean, obviously.
09:02You believe that to be true.
09:03You believe that.
09:03And does that mean that issues of judicial corruption?
09:07No, no.
09:07Does that mean that a school textbook must not include references to judicial corruption?
09:11It must, Rajdeep, but you must see the contextualization which has not been done.
09:18Rajdeep, I want to ask you a question.
09:19You are a journalist.
09:20You have journalistic ethics.
09:22You yourself on your show never say ABC is corrupt.
09:26You say it is alleged that so-and-so is corrupt, right?
09:30Until proven, a person is only alleged to be guilty.
09:34Look at this headline.
09:35Corruption in the judiciary.
09:37Give us data.
09:37Give us statistics.
09:39Give us proof about it.
09:40And remember, it is not my case that there is no corruption in the judiciary.
09:44Don't expect me to say that.
09:46You're right in saying I stand for transparency.
09:49It is the transparency which I'm demanding.
09:52Look, on your show, you've got Justice Varma's case over there.
09:55How can anybody say that there is no alleged corruption in the judiciary?
10:00There is.
10:00These things need investigation.
10:02It's very, very serious.
10:04The issue is serious.
10:05I'm only asking that you debate it at a serious level.
10:08Call, call upon the judiciary to have a transparent system.
10:13Put it in.
10:13Unless you say we want to get away with the judiciary and let the executive give us justice.
10:18No.
10:18We are going to continue to go to the judiciary for justice.
10:21And what we want is a transparent, participatory judiciary.
10:28Right.
10:29Okay.
10:30I want to hold you to your thoughts because I have a graphic.
10:33And I want to come to Justice Sanjeev Banerjee now.
10:36Source, government in Lok Sabha 2026.
10:38From 2016 to 2025, the number of complaints have gone up.
10:43Just look at how the complaints have gone up significantly.
10:47The figure is slowly but surely climbing.
10:49And we are now reaching a stage where this is a serious concern.
10:53Should this not be seen as a serious concern as well?
10:57Justice Banerjee, when I look at complaints against sitting judges, now up to 1102 from 682 in 2017.
11:05Should I, Justice Banerjee, not be worried?
11:08And if the students are told about it, are we saying that these 14-year-olds are so infantile
11:13that they will suddenly think that the entire judiciary is corrupt?
11:18No, Rajiv.
11:19There are two answers.
11:20One is that, is there corruption in the judiciary?
11:25There certainly is.
11:26Are these figures anything to go by?
11:28They are nothing at all.
11:30However, why has the judiciary been singled out for corruption?
11:33Is there no corruption amongst politicians, in the executive, in the bureaucracy?
11:39Why has the judiciary been singled out?
11:42This is the judiciary being asked to fall in line or whatever else may be coming.
11:53No, no, no.
11:54I mean, just to say that, why don't you mention executive corruption?
11:57Why don't you mention bureaucratic corruption?
11:59Or dare I say, journalistic corruption?
12:01I mean, that's what about, Justice Banerjee?
12:04What about other corruption?
12:05They've mentioned judicial in this context.
12:07They've also spoken of judicial delays.
12:09I come back to it.
12:10Is it such an affront to our judges to talk about judicial corruption?
12:15It may not be.
12:16It may not be, there's no proper mechanism to deal with corruption within the system.
12:22Yet, the judiciary is such a special body that it needs to deal with corruption in-house.
12:29And it can't be opened out, so to say.
12:32Every failed litigant will have a complaint.
12:35But for every 10 complaints or 20 complaints, maybe one or two are worthy of being pursued.
12:43I know from my experience of nearly 18 years, we've removed several judges in the lower judiciary.
12:49However, when it comes to the high court, and I can speak only up to the high court, because that's
12:54my level, nothing's been done.
12:58Complaints have been made by chief justices, two chief justices of India, and they have been brushed aside or they
13:06have not been taken notice of.
13:08And there are several cases like this.
13:10No, but what's wrong, that's precisely it.
13:12With due regard, Justice Banerjee, that's precisely it.
13:14If there is, if this, if this chapter triggers a debate on judicial corruption among the young, what's the harm?
13:22What's the harm if in school, I read about it.
13:24I'm doing a political science paper.
13:25I want to be abreast with contemporary issues.
13:27You talk about corruption in society, corruption among the politicians.
13:34I think the incidence of corruption is much lower in the judiciary.
13:37But you don't talk about that.
13:39You talk about, and in what context?
13:42In the context that cases are piling up.
13:45Cases are piling up because there are not enough judges.
13:48There's not enough infrastructure.
13:50And no political dispensation wants a strong judiciary.
13:55They want the judiciary to conform.
13:57And look what's happening.
13:59There's no media which is worth its name now.
14:02Otherwise, people who are heading media channels won't have private blogs to air their private opinions.
14:11Because you do not have probably the independence or authority to air what you want to say in your channel,
14:19that some people have to open up private blogs.
14:23I speak out my mind, but I'm taking...
14:27Sir, sir, it's not media.
14:28Sir, it's not media versus judiciary.
14:30I want to make it clear.
14:31It's not media versus judiciary here.
14:33Sir, it's a concerted attempt to put the judiciary down and attack the judiciary.
14:39Several institutions have been attacked and have been taken over.
14:43The election commission, no less, even a body like the Reserve Bank of India is infiltrated with people who have
14:49no place to be on the board of that institution.
14:53And so the judiciary is also...
14:55Sir, it's a very, very strong words again.
14:58Okay.
14:59I take your point.
15:00I want to come to Vrinda Swaroop, your former special secretary, Department of Education and Literacy.
15:04Ma'am, the NCRT textbook writing process presumably involves various people.
15:09Can we hold one person responsible?
15:12And this is a government body.
15:13And this is a government that looks very closely at every word.
15:16So, who is to be held accountable, if at all, in case, as the judges are now saying that this
15:22is unacceptable and there must be accountability?
15:24Who is accountable for writing the NCRT textbooks, ma'am?
15:28So, just three quick points on that, Rajdeep.
15:31One is that the NCRT is the body for writing the textbooks.
15:37And they had, from when I was secretary in the Department of School Education and Literacy,
15:43and my experience there has been that they were actually a very diligent body, and traditionally been so.
15:50And there are layers and layers of scrutiny which are carried out before the textbook is actually released for use.
16:01So, you know, there are the textbook writers, and there is the department which is in charge of that particular
16:08subject,
16:09and then they have an editorial board, and then there's an institutional scrutiny.
16:14So, there are lots of layers which, so I am a bit surprised that something like this has gone through.
16:21But the second point is that when you draft and you put together textbooks for students who are elementary education
16:30level,
16:30this was class eight, you normally don't introduce any kind of judgmental or such provocative words.
16:42You stick to what is the nature of the subject, the facts, the context.
16:47In this case, it was obvious, and it is there in that chapter also.
16:52I have read that chapter.
16:54So, that is where you go, and you basically are giving a young, vulnerable student the right kind of knowledge
17:01about his constitution, her system of governance in the country, etc.
17:07But ma'am, ma'am, I take your point, you are saying these are vulnerable minds,
17:12but the court's order then sets a precedent that could discourage textbook authors and educators
17:18from addressing sensitive topics like corruption in public life.
17:21I come back to it.
17:22What is this political hot potato?
17:25Corruption is an open secret, unfortunately, in this country.
17:28Shouldn't the young know about it?
17:29So, the third point which I was making was that you have these textbooks which are in a certain sense
17:36bland and factual and contextual, but the pedagogy of teaching is where you interrogate issues,
17:44where you interrogate, you give that student a context which is of maybe discussions like this,
17:51but they have to be contextualized, they have to be led in a certain direction,
17:56because I reiterate, an elementary school kid cannot be given a hype, he or she has to be given a
18:05context.
18:06There are challenges in every system, any arm of governance, so there has to be a contextualized discussion led,
18:15so that what is the purpose?
18:16The purpose is that she absorbs that, she absorbs what is the scenario of the context.
18:24I take your point, ma'am.
18:27I take your point.
18:28You know, Indira Jaisingh, I come back to it where I started off.
18:31You've been always a crusader on these issues.
18:33Now, you're saying let's have a debate on transparency in the judiciary, let's take a...
18:39What if something like this, this writing triggered off that debate?
18:42At some stage, surely, we can't sweep these issues under a carpet.
18:47No, we cannot sweep them under the carpet, not at all.
18:51And I agree with you, it's a perfect opportunity to have a really serious debate.
18:58But I'm very clear in my mind that the existing system has not delivered.
19:03Rajdeep, the fountain of justice must not be corrupted at its source.
19:08And the source is the issue of appointments.
19:10The point is, what is the transparency there at the time of appointment of judges?
19:15It is there that we need openness.
19:18It is there that we need the right to make a complaint.
19:22Lay public should be able to make a complaint.
19:23So, if children are taught...
19:24You know, I think...
19:25But what if children are taught this?
19:26Let's assume they are not class 8.
19:28What if they were class 12 political science students?
19:30And they were told, what is the present system?
19:32What are the weaknesses in it?
19:33What are the loopholes?
19:34Would you have a problem with it?
19:35Listen, Rajdeep, the data which is there in relation to backlogs, it's also on the website
19:42of the Supreme Court of India.
19:44There's no big secret about the backlogs.
19:46But as the Leonard judge was trying to point out to you, who's responsible for these backlogs?
19:51Let me know.
19:52Do we have the sufficient number of judges?
19:54Why doesn't the executive...
19:56Listen, I will tell you what's the main issue here.
19:58The main issue here is this textbook is under the control of the executive.
20:04So, don't compare it with every author.
20:06Every author is not under the control of the executive.
20:09You can publish any book you want on the issue of the judiciary.
20:14No one is going to stop you from publishing it.
20:16If you've defamed anybody, there will be a civil suit or a criminal case.
20:20If you've committed contempt, there will be...
20:22But you will not be stopped.
20:23The issue here is who is the author of this book?
20:27Who controls this publication?
20:29It is the government of India.
20:31So, the narrative has to be...
20:33I've taken your point.
20:36I will ask you, therefore, Justice Banerjee, in conclusion, straight answer.
20:40Are judges immune from criticism?
20:42Do judges have a thin skin, as some believe?
20:45No, they don't.
20:46But, of course, judges can't defend themselves.
20:49That's one big point.
20:51You know, and there is always a party which loses the matter.
20:55And usually, the losing party, whether advocates appearing for that losing party or the party itself, brings out allegations of
21:03corruption, which in most cases are completely baseless and are not worthy of even taking notice of.
21:11But to attack the judiciary in this way is to undermine its independence.
21:17And that is a consistent thing which has been happening over the last decade or so, to undermine the judiciary
21:25and break its backbone.
21:26And so, today you have two Muslim boys not getting bail for what reason?
21:32We do not know.
21:33We do not know.
21:34We today have a 10-year sentence handed to a journalist for defaming a corporate house or its head honcho.
21:43And we today...
21:44This is the message that the judiciary is taking.
21:46That you fall in line or whatever else we can do.
21:50This is not what is appropriate.
21:53We don't need a government looking over what food we have on the plane, what language we are talking in.
22:01We need a government to take care of our problems.
22:05And while you engage people in this Hindu-Muslim kind of a sideshow, corruption goes on as usual in the
22:15high places.
22:18Okay, let me leave it there.
22:19Very strong words from my participants.
22:21I hope someone out there is listening.
22:23Their concerns should be registered.
22:25But as I said, we need a wider debate on judicial corruption.
22:28Also, dare I say, on media corruption.
22:31No problem with that debate as well.
22:33Indira Jaisingh, Justice Banerjee...
22:35Can I request you to...
22:37Yes, yes, ma'am.
22:37You had 10 seconds.
22:3810 seconds.
22:39Can I request you to host a conclave?
22:41Yes, 10 seconds.
22:42Can I request you to host a conclave?
22:44Call for an open house where we don't have curated questions.
22:48Let's have a debate.
22:50You do it.
22:52Okay, we will try and do that.
22:53I have...
22:54I take up that.
22:55I will try and get that done.
22:57But I appreciate all my guests joining me on my top talking point tonight.
Comments