Chief Justice Surya Kant emphasised that the court has taken cognisance and has the authority to take suo motu action, and that no one will be permitted to “defame the institution”to ncert textbook
Delhi, New Delhi:
Outraged by a section on “corruption in the judiciary” in a new Social Science textbook for Class VIII students, the Supreme Court demanded responsibility from the federal government and the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) on Thursday.A deeper inquiry is what we would prefer.
We must identify the culprit—heads must roll! As it questioned Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was defending the NCERT, the court declared, “We won’t close the case.”
Chief Justice Surya Kant’s bench issued a strong ruling that prohibited the book both domestically and internationally and ordered the seizure of all copies. Additionally, it sent notifications to the center and Professor Dinesh Prasad Saklani, the NCERT Chairman, prohibiting the book from being shared online in whole or in part.
Tushar Mehta had stated moments before that the two people who had mentioned “corruption in the judiciary” in the chapter “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society” would “never work with the UGC or any ministry.” “We support the organization. Nobody will get away with it.
However, the Chief Justice was utterly underwhelmed.That has very little bearing. The Chief Justice became enraged, saying, “They fired a gunshot, and the judiciary is bleeding today. This looks like a deep-rooted conspiracy.” A well-thought-out move.
Mehta was also chastised by the Chief Justice for an NCERT news release admitting that “inappropriate textual material (had) inadvertently crept” into the chapter. The NCERT also stated that it “regrets this error of judgement” in it, but the court felt that this did not amount to the required apology.
Additionally, he mentioned that the book is still on sale, saying, “It’s available in market… I got a copy from sources.”
Mehta said that thirty-two publications had gone on sale but had now been pulled.We shall revise the entire chapter. He took objection on behalf of the court, saying, “There is another part about pendency… ‘justice delayed is justice denied’. We can’t teach that justice is denied.”
He additionally stated, “In the suo motu case (the top court has taken up this matter of its own volition), at the outset we tender an unconditional apology.” However, in response, the Chief Justice said, “…there is no word of apology in this,” citing media reports on the NCERT’s statement.
High-level government officials stated on Wednesday that the phrase “corruption in the judiciary” “shouldn’t have been written… inspirational things should have been written” and that any references to it would be removed.
The Supreme Court had just voiced “severe concern” over the matter and said that the reference had “perturbed” judges of the High Court and other members of the judiciary.
What was stated in the chapter
The updated chapter, “Role of the Judiciary in Our Society,” tackles issues including backlogs and corruption in addition to outlining the court system’s hierarchy and access to justice.
The book emphasized the judiciary’s internal accountability procedures and claimed that judges are subject to a code of conduct that regulates both their behavior within and outside of the courtroom.
Additionally, it stated that both federal and state governments are working to improve public trust and openness, especially by utilizing technology and taking prompt action against corrupt practices.
What attorneys stated
To learn more about the issue, NDTV contacted attorneys.
An education at the school level that “complicates” rather than “educates” young brains has been questioned by senior lawyer Sidhart Luthra. He stated that the purpose of Class VIII is to acquaint students with the functions of the organs of governance.
Speaking of corruption without ‘critical analysis’, according to Supreme Court attorney Pragya Parijat Singh, was a sign of ignorance. “The judiciary has always worked to improve legislation. Everything has advantages and disadvantages. However, it demonstrates a lack of understanding to bring it up in this manner without critically examining the role the judiciary has played in forming Indian democracy,” she said.
Read more Shocking News here
