Syllabus: GS2/Polity & Governance
Context
- Recently, the Supreme Court of India has imposed a blanket ban on a Class 8 NCERT textbook chapter dealing with corruption in the judiciary, and warned of ‘serious action’ in case of non-compliance.
Observations of the Supreme Court
- A Bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant made the following key observations:
- The inclusion of the chapter appeared to be a ‘calculated move to undermine the institution’.
- It may amount to criminal contempt due to its potential to lower the authority of the judiciary.
- The matter requires a deeper probe.
- If unchecked, such actions could erode public faith in the judiciary.
- The Court emphasized institutional responsibility: ‘Heads must roll’.
- The Solicitor General tendered an unconditional and unqualified apology on behalf of the Ministry of Education.
Constitutional and Legal Dimensions
- Independence of Judiciary: Part of the Basic Structure Doctrine(Kesavananda Bharati case).
- Ensures autonomy from executive and legislative interference.
- Essential for rule of law and constitutional supremacy.
- The Court appears to view the chapter as an attempt to weaken this institutional independence.
- Contempt of Court: It is governed by Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Criminal contempt includes acts that:
- Scandalize or lower the authority of the court;
- Interfere with judicial proceedings;
- Obstruct administration of justice;
- The Bench indicated that the chapter may fall within this definition.
- Freedom of Expression vs Institutional Integrity: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression. Reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) include contempt of court; defamation; and public order.
- The issue highlights a tension between academic discourse and criticism of institutions, and protection of judicial dignity and authority.
- Role of NCERT and Curriculum Governance: NCERT develops national curriculum frameworks.
- Curriculum content often becomes politically and constitutionally sensitive.
- Judicial scrutiny of textbooks has occurred in the past in matters involving ideology, history, and constitutional values.
- This incident raises questions about curriculum oversight mechanisms, academic accountability, and institutional consultation processes.
- Governance and Institutional Trust: The Supreme Court stressed that unchecked actions could erode public confidence in the judiciary.
- In a democracy, courts derive legitimacy from public trust, and constructive criticism strengthens institutions.
- However, unfounded or sensational allegations may weaken institutional credibility.
- Maintaining balance is critical for democratic stability.
- Judicial corruption refers to misuse of judicial authority for private gain, including bribery, favoritism, influence in appointments, and case manipulation.
Constitutional Position of Judiciary in India
- In India, while the higher judiciary enjoys constitutional independence, concerns have periodically emerged regarding transparency, accountability, and ethical standards.
- Article 50: Separation of judiciary from executive
- Articles 124–147: Structure and independence of Supreme Court
- Articles 214–231: High Courts
- Article 129 & 215: Power to punish for contempt
- Basic Structure Doctrine: Judicial independence is part of the basic structure
- Judicial independence is essential to rule of law, but independence without accountability risks institutional insularity.
Key Institutional Concerns
- Appointment Process (Collegium System): The collegium system, evolved through the Three Judges Cases, has been criticized for lack of transparency.
- It promotes opacity and elite capture.
- Contempt Jurisdiction: The judiciary’s power to punish for ‘scandalizing the court’ sometimes creates tension between accountability and institutional protection.
- In-House Mechanism: Internal judicial inquiry processes lack statutory backing and transparency.
