The Supreme Court of India has retracted its earlier directive that effectively blacklisted three academicians involved in drafting a controversial NCERT textbook chapter regarding corruption in the judiciary. The decision, delivered on Friday, came as the Court acknowledged the explanations provided by the academicians, Professor Michel Danino, Suparna Diwakar, and Alok Prasanna Kumar, and opted to modify its previous order issued on March 11.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, noted that while the content of the NCERT Class 8 textbook chapter was “undesirable,” steps were already underway to address it. These include the formation of an expert committee led by a former judge to review and revise the curriculum. “In view of the explanation furnished by the applicants, namely the authors, we deem it appropriate to modify paragraph 8 of the order and recall the direction issued to the Government of India, the State Governments, Union Territories, universities, and educational institutions to disassociate themselves from the applicants in academic activities,” stated the Court.
The bench left the decision of associating with the three experts to the discretion of the governments and competent authorities, clarifying that they are free to make independent decisions without influence from the prior court observations. Additionally, the Court withdrew its earlier assertion that the experts had misrepresented facts. “The opening line of paragraph 8 of the order, to the effect that the three applicants had deliberately or knowingly misrepresented facts, is also recalled in light of the explanation tendered by them,” the Court’s order elaborated.
The controversy ignited when a section within the textbook, “Exploring Society: India and Beyond,” highlighted “corruption in the judiciary” within a chapter on the judiciary’s role in society. The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the textbook, expressing concern that its contents could undermine the judiciary’s dignity. Following the Court’s intervention, the NCERT issued a press note characterizing the inclusion as an inadvertent mistake and announced the withdrawal and revision of the content.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central Government, stated, “We will not like to be associated with any such members who drafted that class 8 chapter.” The case was then referred to a three-member committee to examine the issue further. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing Professor Danino, argued that the original order was passed ex-parte and unfairly impacted the experts.
More Read
Justice Bagchi acknowledged the chapter’s imbalance, noting the absence of discussions on access to justice and legal aid, while highlighting corruption. “We are not concerned with whether it is positive or negative. We wanted to see whether it was balanced or not, and we felt that it was not balanced,” he stated.
Senior Advocates Gopal Sankarnarayanan and J Sai Deepak, representing Kumar and Diwakar respectively, emphasized that there was no malicious intent in the chapter’s content. The Court’s proceedings continue to draw public and media attention, reflecting the sensitive nature of the issues involved.
