Beyond textbook uproar: The 6 values NCERT ‘judicial corruption’ chapter aimed to teach
Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct define six pillars of judicial ethics including independence, integrity, and impartiality guiding judges in India and globally.
NCERT Class 8 textbook controversy: Much clamour surrounds the recent uproar, which resulted in the NCERT pulling out the Class 8 textbook having a chapter on “judicial corruption”, with the CJI Surya Kant, cautioning that he “will not allow anyone to defame the institution”. As the debate rages on, it is interesting to note that the chapter included contents on the overarching code for judicial discipline, namely, the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002).
Judges are bound by a code of conduct that governs not only their behaviour in court, but also how they conduct themselves outside it, the court said. (Image is enhanced using AI)
In addition to the code, the chapter also mentioned the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) under India’s centralised grievance portal, using which the citizens may file complaints against public authorities, including matters touching the justice system.
A part of the chapter states, “Judges are bound by a code of conduct that governs not only their behaviour in court, but also how they conduct themselves outside it. This code, known as the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct(so named because the initial drafts were prepared in Bangalore/ Bengaluru over two decades ago), emphasises that judges must be seen by the public as fair and impartial. They must avoid any action, in their personal and professional lives, that could cause the public to question their integrity”.
A quick reading of the description of the contents from the NCERT chapter states that “judges are made to observe Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (2002) once they enter into judicial service, as the judges must be seen as fair and impartial”.
A six-pillar code of judicial conduct, it adds, is intended to preserve public confidence in courts, and is as follows:
1. Independence
The Bangalore code states the first pillar, independence, insists that judges must decide cases free from external pressures, whether political, financial or social.
Story continues below this ad
A judge shall exercise the judicial function independently based on an assessment of the facts and in accordance with the understanding of the law, free from any influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.
Judges shall be independent in relation to society in general.
A judge shall not only be free from inappropriate connections with, and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government.
In performing judicial duties, a judge shall be independent of judicial colleagues in respect of decisions which the judge is obliged to make independently.
A judge shall encourage and uphold safeguards for the discharge of judicial duties to maintain and enhance the institutional and operational independence of the judiciary.
A judge shall exhibit and promote high standards of judicial conduct to reinforce public confidence in the judiciary, which is fundamental to the maintenance of judicial independence.
2. Impartiality
Impartiality, which stands as the second value in the code, requires not only the absence of bias, but the appearance of fairness; a judge must recuse themselves where conflicts arise.
A judge shall perform his or her judicial duties without favour, bias or prejudice.
A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct, both in and out of court, maintains and enhances the confidence of the public, the legal profession and litigants in the impartiality of the judge and of the judiciary.
A judge shall, so far as is reasonable, so conduct himself or herself as to minimise the occasions on which it will be necessary for the judge to be disqualified from hearing or deciding cases.
A judge shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before, or could come before, the judge, make any comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or impair the manifest fairness of the process.
Nor shall the judge make any comment in public or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of any person or issue.
A judge shall disqualify himself or herself from participating in any proceedings in which the judge is unable to decide the matter impartially or in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that the judge is unable to decide the matter impartially.
3. Integrity
The third cardinal value mentioned in the Bangalore code is integrity, which demands that a judge’s conduct be beyond reproach, reinforcing the maxim that ‘justice must not only be done but be seen to be done’.
A judge shall ensure that his or her conduct is above reproach in the view of a reasonable observer.
The behaviour and conduct of a judge must reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but must also be seen to be done.
4. Propriety
Propriety, which is the fourth value in the code, states that judges are urged to avoid impropriety and even its appearance, including refraining from accepting gifts or allowing personal relationships to influence judicial work.
A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s activities.
As a subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge must accept personal restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. In particular, a judge shall conduct himself or herself in a way that is consistent with the dignity of the judicial office.
A judge shall, in his or her personal relations with individual members of the legal profession who practise regularly in the judge’s court, avoid situations which might reasonably give rise to the suspicion or appearance of favouritism or partiality. A judge shall not participate in the determination of a case in which any member of the judge’s family represents a litigant or is associated in any manner with the case.
A judge shall not allow the use of the judge’s residence by a member of the legal profession to receive clients or other members of the legal profession.
A judge, like any other citizen, is entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly, but in exercising such rights, a judge shall always conduct himself or herself in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
A judge shall inform himself or herself about the judge’s personal and fiduciary financial interests and shall make reasonable efforts to be informed about the financial interests of members of the judge’s family.
A judge shall not allow the judge’s family, social or other relationships improperly to influence the judge’s judicial conduct and judgment as a judge.
5. Equality
Equality is the fifth value in the Bangalore code and mandates that all individuals be treated without discrimination on grounds such as race, gender, religion or social status.
Story continues below this ad
A judge shall be aware of, and understand, diversity in society and differences arising from various sources, including but not limited to race, colour, sex, religion, national origin, caste, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, social and economic status and other like causes (“irrelevant grounds”).
A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct, manifest bias or prejudice towards any person or group on irrelevant grounds.
A judge shall carry out judicial duties with appropriate consideration for all persons, such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court staff and judicial colleagues, without differentiation on any irrelevant ground, immaterial to the proper performance of such duties.
6. Competence and Diligence
Lastly, the code’s sixth cardinal value is competence and diligence. It says judicial office is not merely honorary but functional, judges must remain legally informed, deliver decisions promptly and maintain decorum in proceedings. Together, these principles frame judicial office as a public trust, a trust that rests not only on constitutional guarantees but on daily adherence to ethical discipline.
The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all other activities.
A judge shall devote the judge’s professional activity to judicial duties, which include not only the performance of judicial functions and responsibilities in court and the making of decisions, but also other tasks relevant to the judicial office or the court’s operations.
A judge shall take reasonable steps to maintain and enhance the judge’s knowledge, skills and personal qualities necessary for the proper performance of judicial duties, taking advantage for this purpose of the training and other facilities which should be made available, under judicial control, to judges.
A judge shall keep themselves informed about relevant developments of international law, including international conventions and other instruments establishing human rights norms.
A judge shall perform all judicial duties, including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness.
A judge shall maintain order and decorum in all proceedings before the court and be patient, dignified and courteous in relation to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity. The judge shall require similar conduct of legal representatives, court staff and others subject to the judge’s influence, direction or control.
A judge shall not engage in conduct incompatible with the diligent discharge of judicial duties.
Somya Panwar works with the Legal Desk at The Indian Express, where she covers the various High Courts across the country and the Supreme Court of India. Her writing is driven by a deep interest in how law influences society, particularly in areas of gender, feminism, and women’s rights.
She is especially drawn to stories that examine questions of equality, autonomy, and social justice through the lens of the courts. Her work aims to make complex legal developments accessible, contextual, and relevant to everyday readers, with a focus on explaining what court decisions mean beyond legal jargon and how they shape public life.
Alongside reporting, she manages the social media presence for Indian Express Legal, where she designs and curates posts using her understanding of digital trends, audience behaviour, and visual communication. Combining legal insight with strategic content design, she works on building engagement and expanding the desk’s digital reach.
Somya holds a B.A. LL.B and a Master’s degree in Journalism. Before moving fully into media, she gained experience in litigation and briefly worked in corporate, giving her reporting a strong foundation. ... Read More
