‘Heads must roll!’ Supreme Court cracks down on NCERT textbook over judiciary chapter

The order came during the hearing of a suo motu case taken up by the apex court over the chapter titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society.” The court also directed authorities to seize all existing copies of the book and issued notices to the Centre and NCERT Chairman Professor Dinesh Prasad Saklani.

Expressing strong displeasure, the bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant sought accountability from both the central government and NCERT, warning of a deeper probe to identify those responsible for the inclusion of the controversial material.

"… heads must roll! We won't close the case," the court thundered in response to Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta who was arguing for NCERT, NDTV reports.

According to reports, the Chief Justice made sharp observations during the hearing, stating that the matter would not be closed without fixing responsibility. The remarks came in response to submissions by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared on behalf of NCERT.

The court also questioned the circumstances under which the content was included, describing it as a serious issue affecting the credibility and integrity of the judiciary.

In a press release issued earlier, NCERT said the distribution of the textbook had been put on hold after concerns were raised over the content. The council acknowledged that “certain inappropriate textual material and error of judgement” had inadvertently appeared in the chapter.

NCERT termed the lapse “purely unintentional” and reiterated that it holds the judiciary in the highest regard, describing it as the protector of the Constitution and fundamental rights. The council expressed regret over the error but did not issue a formal apology.

However, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with the response, noting the absence of a clear apology in the statement.

During the hearing, when the court observed that copies of the book were still available in the market, the Solicitor General informed the bench that 32 copies that had entered circulation had since been withdrawn.

The matter remains under judicial scrutiny, with the apex court indicating that further action may follow.