After Independence, India adopted a constitutional democratic system based on a four-pillar structure comprising the Legislature, the Executive, the Judiciary, and the Election Commission. This framework formed the foundation on which the entire governance system stands. Importantly, the makers of the Constitution did not make the Judiciary and the Election Commission subordinate organs of the government. They ensured that the Constitution of India, which grants every adult citizen the right to vote, would make any government formed by majority accountable above all to the Constitution itself. The responsibility of safeguarding this accountability was entrusted to the judicial system.
Thus, through an independent, impartial, and “non-political” judiciary, every political party coming to power on the basis of majority was obligated to keep the democratic system aligned strictly with constitutional principles. While the Legislature was granted the authority to amend the Constitution and enact new laws, the Judiciary was empowered to examine all such actions on the touchstone of constitutional validity. This was done to ensure that under no circumstances would the rule of the Constitution be violated in India.
From this perspective, the Judiciary occupies a sacred position in India’s democracy, before which every government must justify its actions. Therefore, the discussion of alleged procedural flaws in the chapter titled “Judiciary and Corruption,” included in the Class VIII curriculum, appears entirely misplaced and ill-intentioned. By doing so, the authors of the chapter risk instilling doubt in young minds at an early age about the purity of democratic institutions. It is fortunate that the country’s Supreme Court took cognizance of the matter and issued notices to the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and the Ministry of Education, prohibiting the circulation of the textbook. The book has since been withdrawn from the Class VIII syllabus.
However, the real question remains: why did NCERT, a government-controlled institution, attempt such an inclusion, and how did it receive approval across official platforms? The Class VIII Social Science curriculum introduces students to the components of India’s democratic system. At this stage, students need to learn about the structure on which the governance of the country is based. An understanding of procedural shortcomings and systemic flaws is more appropriate at higher levels of education. As students advance to senior classes, they naturally become aware of the various weaknesses that may have entered the system. But if, at an early stage, they are told that the independent judicial system established by the framers of the Constitution is incapable of functioning with integrity, it may foster a sense of disrespect toward the institution and damage its prestige in society and the nation at large.
In this context, reports that Prime Minister Narendra Modi sought preliminary information on the matter cannot be ignored. During a Cabinet meeting, he reportedly asked the Education Minister who was overseeing the curriculum design. As far as corruption is concerned, it is a pervasive malaise from which no branch of governance can be considered entirely free. However, the most frequent discussions about corruption usually relate to the Legislature, as it is directly linked to the country’s politics.
The people of India are aware of how the Manmohan Singh-led government, which remained in power until 2014, was voted out amid allegations of corruption. Yet does this imply that corruption has been accepted as a norm within our democratic framework? Can we teach students that the Legislature—the most important and supreme pillar of Indian democracy—has become hollow due to corruption? Similarly, awareness about corruption in the Executive develops gradually as citizens grow older and gain information from various media sources. But when teaching young students about the country’s governance system, the focus should remain on its foundational elements.
As students progress to higher classes, they can independently learn about procedural deficiencies and systemic challenges. Therefore, the perspective adopted by NCERT regarding the Judiciary was deeply unfortunate and had the potential to embarrass India’s democratic system. In doing so, the institution also put its own credibility into question, as it suggests a lack of clarity about its role in national development. The development of any nation depends on its citizens. If from childhood citizens are led to believe that the system in which they live has become barren due to human weaknesses, their motivation to become responsible individuals and improve the system may diminish. Their ideals and aspirations may also shift.
We must not forget that India is a country where even today stories are told of Emperor Vikramaditya’s throne being regarded as a symbol of justice. The history of the judiciary in independent India, to a large extent, has revolved around a similar reverence for justice and fairness.
