Judiciary not averse to criticism but uninformed assertion: Supreme Court in NCERT order
The Supreme Court of India closed a suo motu case regarding controversial content in an NCERT textbook that alleged corruption in the judiciary. The court emphasized that while it welcomes fair criticism, such discourse must be rational and voiced through appropriate forums rather than presented as fact to students.
Why it matters
This ruling clarifies the legal boundaries between institutional accountability and the dissemination of unverified claims in educational materials.
The judiciary is not, and cannot be, averse to criticism, the Supreme Court has said while cautioning that such criticism be voiced through the appropriate forum and in a fair, rational mechanism.
The observations by a Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana came while closing suo motu proceedings pertaining to the contents of the Class 8 NCERT textbook which referred to ‘ corruption in the judiciary ’.
The Supreme Court said the distinction lies not between criticism and silence, but between responsible discourse and uninformed assertion.
Editorial | Selective outrage: on Supreme Court and NCERT textbook
“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.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in