The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered a “blanket ban” on the Class 8 NCERT book for social science which included controversial portions, with a chapter on “corruption in judiciary.”
Apart from this, the SC bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymala Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, also ordered the immediate seizure of physical copies of the textbook and demanded a takedown of its digital versions.
The court issues show-cause notices to director of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), and the secretary, department of school education, asking them why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated in the matter.
What Supreme Court said during the NCERT hearing:
• ‘We would like to have a deeper probe’: The Supreme Court sought a “deeper probe” into the matter, while indicating that there was a “deep-rooted conspiracy” to malign the judiciary. “We would like to have a deeper probe. We need to find who is responsible and we will see who are there,” CJI Kant said. He said the inclusion of the “corruption in judiciary” section was a “calculated move”.
• ‘Heads must roll’: The court said that those responsible for the incident must be held accountable. CJI Kant said it was important to find out those responsible for the publication. “As the head of the institution, I must find out who the persons who are responsible behind it. Heads must roll, I am not going to close these proceedings,” the Chief Justice of India said.
{{/usCountry}}• ‘Heads must roll’: The court said that those responsible for the incident must be held accountable. CJI Kant said it was important to find out those responsible for the publication. “As the head of the institution, I must find out who the persons who are responsible behind it. Heads must roll, I am not going to close these proceedings,” the Chief Justice of India said.
{{/usCountry}}• ‘No remorse but justification’: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta tendered an apology in court over the incident, while the NCERT had in an earlier statement expressed regret over the “inappropriate material”. "In the suo motu case, at the outset we tender an unconditional apology," Mehta said.
However, the SC bench stated that the NCERT response had lacked remorse. “We have seen the NCERT notice, and there is not a simple word of apology in it. The way this director has drafted this notice, there seems no remorse but justification…” the bench noted
• ‘They fired gunshot, judiciary is bleeding’: While the Solicitor General assured that the two people who prepared the two chapters would not work with the UGC or any ministry again, the SC said that this would be a “very easy” way out. “That will be very easy then and they go scot-free,” the bench said. “They fired the gunshot. Judiciary is bleeding today,” CJI Kant said in response to the Solicitor General.
• ‘We do not propose to stifle legitimate critique’: In all this, the Supreme Court also clarified that it was not attempting to stifle any constructive criticism of the judiciary. “We hasten to add that we do not propose the suo motu proceedings to stifle any legitimate critique or exercising right to scrutinise judiciary. We are of the firm conviction that rigorous discourse helps the living vitality of the institution,” the court said.
It said that this “judicial intervention” was not to suppress criticism but to “uphold the integrity of education.” The SC bench said it would be “improper” to expose students to a “biased narrative” at this age, when they are starting to “navigate the nuances of public life and institutional architecture.”