The National Council of Educational Research and Training, commonly known as NCERT, has stopped distributing its newly released Class 8 social science textbook after strong objections from the Supreme Court of India. The move came after concerns were raised about a chapter discussing corruption in the judiciary.

In a press release dated February 25, 2026, NCERT acknowledged that it had made what it described as an “error of judgment” by including a chapter titled “The Role of Judiciary in Our Society” in the book. The council admitted that certain portions of the content were not appropriate.

The press release clearly stated: “On receiving the textbook, it has been observed that certain inappropriate textual material and error of judgment have inadvertently crept into Chapter No 4, entitled “The Role of Judiciary in Our Society” (pg 125-142),” adding that the Ministry of Education had directed that distribution of the book be stopped immediately. This direction was not optional. It was a formal instruction.

NCERT further explained that the Department of School Education and Literacy under the Ministry of Education had also reviewed the book and reached the same conclusion. The statement read: “The Department of School Education & Literacy (Ministry of Education) also made a similar observation and directed that the distribution of this book may be kept on strict hold until further orders. The same has been complied with,” the NCERT said.

The council emphasized that it holds the judiciary in the highest respect. It sought to clarify that there was no intention to undermine the institution. In its own words, “The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) holds the judiciary in the highest esteem and considers it to be the upholder of the Indian Constitution and protector of Fundamental Rights. The aforesaid error is purely unintentional, and NCERT regrets the inclusion of inappropriate material in the said chapter,” the NCERT asserted.

The matter quickly escalated to the highest level of the judiciary. On Wednesday, 25 February, a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant took suo motu cognisance of the issue. This means the court acted on its own without waiting for a formal petition. The Chief Justice expressed strong displeasure over the chapter that discussed corruption in the judiciary.

Treating the issue as a serious attack on the institution, the Chief Justice remarked that he would not “allow anyone on earth to defame the judiciary.” He went further and described the chapter as part of a “deep-rooted and calculated conspiracy” to damage the reputation of the judicial system. According to him, the judiciary continues to enjoy a high level of public trust, and any attempt to weaken that trust would not be tolerated.

The chapter in question was not limited to criticism. It explained how courts are structured, how citizens can access justice, and the challenges faced by the system. These challenges included corruption, a heavy backlog of cases, and a shortage of judges. The textbook also presented data on the scale of pending cases in Indian courts. It estimated that around 81,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court, about 62.40 lakh cases in High Courts, and nearly 4.70 crore cases in district and subordinate courts. The stated aim of the chapter was to help students understand the real-world pressures on the justice system.

Supreme Court Imposes Blanket Ban and Issues Contempt Notice

The situation intensified on Thursday when the Supreme Court imposed a complete blanket ban on the publication, reprinting, and digital circulation of the Class 8 social science textbook. The objection was specifically related to references in the chapter that mentioned “corruption at various levels of the judiciary”.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, observed that the publication of the book appeared to be serious misconduct. The bench stated that it could fall within the scope of criminal contempt of court.

The court issued a contempt notice to the Secretary of School Education in the Ministry of Education and to the NCERT Director. They were asked to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them.

The textbook, titled Exploring Society: India and Beyond (Part 2, First Edition), had been released by NCERT on 24 February 2026. Chapter 4, “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society”, mentioned corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and shortage of judges as key challenges. It also referred to hundreds of complaints received against judges. By selectively quoting a former Chief Justice of India, it suggested that institutional corruption within the judiciary had been acknowledged.

The Supreme Court described the inclusion of such material in a textbook meant for school students as a calculated attempt to undermine the dignity of the judiciary. The bench observed that it appeared, at first glance, to amount to criminal contempt by scandalising the institution.

Chief Justice Surya Kant pointed out that while the chapter highlighted negative aspects, it did not discuss the judiciary’s strong history or its role in protecting constitutional morality. He noted that it failed to mention contributions such as upholding the basic structure doctrine, strengthening legal aid, and improving access to justice. According to him, the book did not reflect the transformative initiatives taken by the court over the years.

He also expressed concern about the impact on young students. He said that exposing impressionable minds to what he viewed as a one-sided narrative could create long-lasting misunderstandings. The book, he observed, would reach not only students but also teachers, parents, and future generations.

The Chief Justice described the publication as part of a deeply planned attempt to damage the image of the judiciary. He said that heads must roll and added that a gunshot had been fired and the judiciary was bleeding. At the same time, he clarified that the court was not trying to silence fair criticism but was acting to protect the integrity of the national curriculum and the institution’s standing in public life.

In its detailed order, the Supreme Court directed a complete ban on further publication, reprinting, or digital sharing of the book. It warned that any attempt to bypass the order through electronic methods or by changing the book’s title would be treated as a willful breach and interference with the administration of justice.

The court also ordered the immediate seizure and removal of all copies, whether physical or digital. This included copies in storage, retail outlets, and schools.

The order clearly stated: “It shall be personal responsibility of NCERT Director and the principal of every school where the book has reached to effectuate immediate seizure and sealing of all copies of the book in their premises and submit a compliance report. Ensure that no instruction is imparted based on the subject book. Principal Secretaries of all states are to comply. Compliance to be sent within 2 weeks.”

The bench further warned: “Any attempt to circumvent this order through electronic means or altered titles shall be seen as direct interference, willful breach and defiance of directions.”

In addition, the apex court directed the NCERT Director to submit the names of all individuals involved in drafting the chapter. The original meeting minutes related to the discussion and finalization of the chapter were also ordered to be produced at the next hearing.

The court stated that those who authored and defended the chapter would no longer be associated with NCERT or any other ministry in the future. Reacting strongly, the Chief Justice remarked, “That’s very little consequence. They fired gunshot, judiciary is bleeding today,” CJI said.

It is important to note that NCERT had already stopped distribution of the book after the initial controversy. In its earlier press release, it had described the inclusion of the content as inappropriate due to an error of judgment. All distributed books were withdrawn, and efforts are underway to retrieve the 32 copies that had already been sold. The chapter is expected to be rewritten in consultation with appropriate authorities.

However, the Supreme Court was not satisfied with the press release. The bench noted that it did not contain a single word of apology. It also described the NCERT Director’s initial written defence of the chapter as contemptuous and reckless.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, offered an unconditional apology on behalf of the government and NCERT. He informed the court that only 32 physical copies had been distributed and would be retrieved. He assured the bench that those responsible for drafting the chapter would not be associated with the Ministry of Education or NCERT in the future. He also undertook to issue a more complete and unqualified public apology.

The matter now stands as a significant development involving the country’s top court, its educational authority, and the content taught to young students across India.