Heads must roll: CJI on NCERT book; PM steps in, wants accountability fixed

“Any attempt to circumvent this order through electronic means or altered titles shall be seen as direct interference, wilful breach and defiance of directions,” the bench warned while asking the government to take down PDF copies of the book available online.

The CJI said the book’s contents warranted a “deeper probe”.

“As head of judiciary, it is my duty to find out who is the person responsible. If there are more than one, heads must roll. Accountability must be there. I am not going to close these proceedings until I am satisfied,” he said.

On Tuesday, The Indian Express first reported that the book “Exploring Society: India and Beyond” – Part 2, which was released Monday, featured a section on challenges faced by the judicial system, listing “corruption” and “massive backlog…on account of multiple reasons, such as a lack of an adequate number of judges, complicated legal procedures, and poor infrastructure”.

Later Tuesday, NCERT halted the book’s sale. On Wednesday, the Council expressed “regret” for what it said was an “inadvertent error” even as the CJI slammed the book’s contents while the Supreme Court registered a suo motu case.

In its order Thursday, the bench said the NCERT Director and the principal of every school where the book has reached will be personally responsible “to effectuate immediate seizure and sealing of all copies of the book in their premises and submit a compliance report”. The bench also asked principal secretaries of all states to file a compliance report in two weeks.

“We were in shock when one of the leading newspapers published” the report, the bench said.

It said that “based on The Indian Express report of February 24, the SC Secretary General was asked to verify whether such a publication has been released by NCERT”.

“Instead of having an introspection of what had been written in the book in a most reckless, irresponsible, contemptuous and motivated manner, the Director responded in writing, defending the contents of the book,” it said.

“On a prima facie examination of the book’s contents, and read in conjunction with the administrative response received from the Director, it seems to us that there is a calculated move to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary. This, if allowed to go unchecked, will erode the sanctity of the judicial office in the estimation of the public at large and more importantly in the impressionable minds of the youth,” it said.

The order said that “while the publication extensively dedicates an entire chapter to the role of judiciary in our society”, it “washes off with one stroke of pen, the illustrious history associated with the Supreme Court, the High Courts and District Courts” and has “conspicuously omitted… the substantial contributions made by these institutions towards the preservation of democratic fabric.”

It said the text of the book “unfortunately fails to acknowledge the imperative role of the judiciary, which it undertakes in upholding constitutional morality and the basic structure doctrine, which are the lifeblood of the Indian citizenry’s public existence”.

“It seems to us that the narrative contained in the book chooses not to delve into any of the transformative initiatives and measures pioneered by this court in overhauling even the legal aid mechanism and streamlining ease of access to justice. This silence is particularly egregious given the sheer volume of high-ranking officials who have been censured by this court in the past for corrupt practices, fraudulent activities, and for illicit siphoning of public funds, etc,” the bench said.

It said that “it seems to us that the choice of words, expressions in the book may not be a simplicitor, inadvertent and bonafide error”.

The bench, however, stressed that its intention was not to “suppress criticism”. The “need for judicial intervention has arisen… from the imperative to safeguard the pedagogical integrity of the national curriculum. Young students in their formative years are only beginning to navigate the nuances of public life and the constitutional architecture that sustains it. It is fundamentally improper to expose them to a biased narrative that may engender permanent misconceptions at this tender age,” it said.

Issuing show cause notice, the bench said, “If proved to be a deliberate move, it will undoubtedly amount to belittling the dignity of the institution and interfering with the administration of justice besides scandalising the institution.” The court will hear the matter next after the Holi recess.

Earlier, as the bench took up the matter, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that “at the outset, we tender an unconditional and unqualified apology… the Secretary, School Education is here”. But the CJI said, “There is not a single word of apology in this notice and the manner in which this Director has attempted to compound.”

“Inadvertent is what they say,” said Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal. “It’s definitely deliberate,” said SCBA president and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh.

“There is no justification, My Lord. We tender an apology,” said Mehta. He said “the two individuals who prepared this chapter will never be associated with any activity of this ministry or, I will try to see, any other ministry.”

The CJI said, “That will be a very mild action, if they are allowed to go scot-free like this… They have fired the gunshot, the judiciary is bleeding today. Yesterday, the kind of messages I received… And today somebody simply says ‘I tender an apology’!”