The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has released a new Class 8 Social Science textbook with a section on "corruption in the judiciary" as a challenge facing the system.
The chapter on the "role of the judiciary in society" lists "corruption at various levels of the judiciary" among key concerns, along with a "massive backlog" of cases.
While the new NCERT chapter also mentions the judiciary's internal accountability mechanisms and refers to the established procedure for receiving complaints through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS), the previous edition focused on explaining the role and structure of the judiciary, the concept of an independent judiciary, and how citizens can access courts; it also acknowledged delays in justice delivery.
This comes just days after the law ministry revealed that the Chief Justice of India's office received 7,528 complaints against sitting judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts between 2016 and 2025. On February 14, in a written reply to a question by MP Matheswaran VS, the Ministry of Law and Justice said complaints against members of the higher judiciary are handled through an "in-house mechanism" evolved by the judiciary.
The explicit mention of corruption in the revised edition has sparked criticism from some quarters. NDTV reached out to lawyers to understand why the inclusion is problematic.
Senior advocate Sidhart Luthra explained that school education is meant to educate and not to complicate young minds.
He said that civics has always been a part of the curriculum of students in school, where they are taught about structures of governance.
At a stage as early as the 8th standard the motive is to familiarise students with organs of governance and their functions. Like what the Parliament does, how the judiciary functions, the role of the executive in implementing legislative policy and so on.
"School education is meant to educate and not to complicate young minds. The comments are the result of minds which are clearly not concerned with educating them but in confusing them. At this stage, the young minds need to first develop an understanding of the structures of governance," Luthra said.
He further added that a comment of such a nature is clearly the view of an individual and not fit to be included in the curriculum. "This is another example of what ails our education system," he added.
Luthra added that it's not that only the judiciary is special and can't be questioned or criticised.
"Every institution is sacrosanct, but the way each of them is questioned in a democracy is different," he said.
While speaking on the powers of the court to initiate "contempt of court", Luthra said that conceptually the judiciary has been held to be the weakest institution, as it cannot implement its own orders.
It needs an executive to implement orders on the ground. And this is why in a democracy an independent judiciary has the powers it has, including powers to initiate "contempt of court" against errants.
Supreme Court advocate Pragya Parijat Singh said the judiciary is among the three pillars of the democracy. History has shown how the judiciary stepped up when the legislature failed.
"Judiciary has always endeavoured to have better laws. Everything has pros and cons. But to mention it this way to young students without any critical analysis of what role the judiciary has played in shaping Indian democracy shows a lack of understanding on their part," she said.
Expressing concern, she said this is a blatant way of portraying the judiciary among young impressionable minds. They should have done critical analysis rather than adding sweeping statements like this, Singh added.
"We all know how the judiciary has shaped and protected the Indian democracy in cases like Kesavananda Bharati, where it gave the important concept of the basic structure of the constitution. Why was there no mention of this?" Singh asked.
Emphasising the need to protect the trust in the institution, Singh also added that there is a reason why we still address judges as "my lords".
This shows the kind of faith we have in them, Singh said.
"The entire criminal justice system functions on trust. The public has the most faith in courts. If such an impression is created in young minds, it would discourage them from coming here or choosing law as a profession," she added.
Supreme Court advocate Gyananant Singh said that there was no need for a chapter like this. What are you trying to achieve by putting a chapter in a book? he asked.
"This could be an issue of news, not academics, that too at such an early stage. Even today, citizens have the most confidence in the judiciary," he said.
He stated that it has been said, "Justice should not only be done, it should be seen to be done".
"This is nothing less than creating a prejudice towards the judiciary among children. We have to be careful in how we portray institutions to young minds," Singh said.
He explained it through the reasons behind why only the judiciary enjoys powers to initiate "contempt of court".
"In earlier days, when the concept of contempt was formulated, even truth was also not considered a defence for someone who committed a contempt of court. Such sweeping powers are to protect the institution which needs protection," he said.
