The Supreme Court recently observed that the Judiciary as an institution is open to criticism and fair, informed and constructive critique of judicial functioning is a legitimate and necessary feature of a vibrant constitutional democracy.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, however, said such criticism must be voiced through an appropriate forum and a fair, rational mechanism. Unverified criticism should not be included in a school curriculum meant for children, the Court said.

“The Judiciary, as an institution, is not, and cannot be, averse to criticism. Fair, informed and constructive critique of judicial functioning is a legitimate and necessary feature of a vibrant constitutional democracy, contributing to institutional accountability and self-correction. What is required, however, is that such criticism be voiced through the appropriate forum and in a fair, rational mechanism, and not find its way, without verification, into a school curriculum meant for impressionable minds. The distinction lies not between criticism and silence, but between responsible discourse and uninformed assertion,” the Court said while closing the suo motu proceedings concerning the NCERT Class 8 Social Science textbook chapter on “Corruption in the Judiciary”.

The Court also clarified that an earlier observation concerning three academics involved in preparing the curriculum was not a finding by the Court.

The clarification was made on an application seeking clarification of the Court's May 22, 2026 order. That paragraph had recorded Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's submission that the curriculum prepared by the applicants had not been brought before the Committee at all levels and, therefore, could not be termed a collective decision.

The Court clarified that this was “merely a statement recorded by this Court” and did not constitute an observation or order of the Court.

On the main proceedings, the Court noted that the Expert Committee comprising former Supreme Court Judge Justice Indu Malhotra, former Attorney General K.K. Venugopal and Professor Prakash Singh had completed its review of the Chapter and other material brought before it.

The Committee, in collaboration with the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal and the reconstituted National Syllabus and Teaching Learning Material Committee, submitted a revised text on the role and functioning of the Judiciary.

The Court noted that the revised chapter had been approved, circulated to students and was in classroom use. After perusing it, the Court opined that it presented an objective, factually accurate and balanced account of the Judiciary, setting out its constitutional role and safeguards of independence and accountability without either glorifying or unfairly disparaging the institution.

In view of the unconditional apologies tendered by the NCERT Director and the Secretary, Department of School Education and Literacy, the recall of the offending publication, the reconstitution of the NSTC and the completion of the Expert Committee's review, the Court held that the object underlying the suo motu proceedings has been substantially achieved.

The show-cause notices issued to the Secretary and the NCERT Director were discharged. The Court directed the Union of India, NCERT and concerned authorities to remain bound by their assurances regarding the content and vetting of educational material relating to public institutions, including the Judiciary, in future editions and curricula.

The Court also appreciated the work of the Expert Committee and the reconstituted NSTC in reviewing the curriculum. The suo motu writ petition was ultimately disposed of and closed.

Case no. – SMW (C) No. 1/2026

Case Title – In Re: Social Science Textbook for Grade–8 (Part-2) Published by NCERT and Ancillary Issues

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 920

Click Here To Read/Download Order