A State afraid of its own reflection

The smell of censorship hangs heavy over Delhi these days, enveloping two books — one for perhaps containing official secrets, the other for calling a spade a spade.

It is a theatre of the absurd, and brings to mind that well-worn World War II anecdote: a man who publicly called Churchill a fool was promptly arrested. Opposition MPs protested in Parliament that England was becoming a police state where free speech was being curbed. Churchill clarified that the man was being proceeded against not because he had called the prime minister a fool, but for revealing a state secret. Unfortunately, this sense of humour is missing in our institutions, having long ago been replaced by a sense of righteousness and entitlement.

We will probably never know what official secrets General Naravane’s book contains that prompted this government to disallow its publication or even a discussion in Parliament. But it is the furore over the other book — a Class 8 Social Sciences textbook published by NCERT — that is more disturbing and warrants deeper reflection. Does Churchill’s quip about revealing a State secret apply to it?

I for one was shocked at the sheer ferocity of the Supreme Court’s reaction when some lawyers brought the book to its notice. The CJI dubbed it “a calculated move to undermine and overawe the judiciary”, to “demean the dignity of the judiciary”, even a “deep-rooted conspiracy”. He called for a “deeper probe”, adding for good measure that no one would be spared and that “heads must roll”. He refused to accept the Centre’s or NCERT’s apologies.

The three academics who wrote the chapter have been blacklisted and debarred from any future engagement by any government institution or university. The book was instantly banned and a Sidney Sheldon-style investigation launched to trace all 38 copies sold so far. I believe about 20 of them have been retrieved; the remaining continue to pose a grave threat to our democracy, like hidden time bombs.

From material in the public domain, one has been able to glean that this was a new Social Sciences textbook for Class 8. It contained a chapter entitled 'The Role of the Judiciary in Our Society'. The offending portion, it is reported, was a sub-chapter called 'Corruption in the Judiciary'.

It attributes delays in the dispensation of justice to factors such as inadequate number of judges, complex legal procedures, poor infrastructure and corruption. It is this latter point which appears to have invited the Court’s ire, even though nine out of ten Indians would likely agree with these conclusions.

Moreover, the book certainly does not target the judiciary alone, as the Court appears to believe. It also criticises other organs of the state. As The Hindu writes in an editorial, the problem with the Supreme Court’s ban “is not that the textbook selectively targets the judiciary, it is that the judiciary selectively targets certain portions”.

Let us not gloss over reality. Corruption has been part of our public life for time immemorial, regularly reinforced by elements of the establishment. It would be a fantasy to expect the judiciary to be an outlier or an exception. Data presented in Parliament in February shows that between 2016 and 2025, 8,600 complaints were filed against sitting judges.

In 2011, Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court was impeached on corruption charges; he resigned before the process concluded but was never prosecuted. In 2018, Justice R.K. Mittal, a tribunal judge, was sacked in a corruption case. The case of Justice Yashwant Verma — in whose official residence crores in unexplained cash were allegedly found just last year — is nowhere near resolution and he continues in service.

More such instances can be found in the book A Controversial Judge (2025) by Paranjoy Guha Thakurta and Ayaskant Das. India ranks 79th out of 143 countries in the Rule of Law Index (2024) — in other words, in the bottom half. Surely the factors listed in the NCERT book may have something to do with this.

An issue that strikes at the very roots of judicial probity should be confronted head-on if we wish to resolve it, not brushed under the carpet. As Prashant Bhushan says: “Judiciary is not above scrutiny and is accountable to the people… Reference to judicial corruption and delays in the NCERT curriculum is in keeping with the constitutional values of transparency and accountability.”

In fact, advocate and eminent legal scholar Gautam Bhatia has questioned whether Article 19 of the Constitution even empowers the Supreme Court to ban a book.

It is unfortunate that the Court has chosen this route. The CJI’s assurance that this “is not meant to stifle any criticism” sadly does not inspire much confidence. There has already been considerable redacting and sanitisation of NCERT textbooks by this government, and we could do without more. Education should prepare our youth for entering this harsh and imperfect world, not gloss over its defects under a coat of judicial enamel paint. As a celebrated poet is said to have said centuries ago:

“Umar bhar Ghalib yahi bhool karta raha
Dhool chehre pe thi, aina saaf karta raha.”

(Your entire life, Ghalib, you repeated this error:
The dust was on your face, you kept wiping the mirror)

Views are personal. This piece first appeared in The Tribune on 15 March, 2026. More of the writer's works can be read here

Avay Shukla is a retired IAS officer and author of Holy Cows and Loose Cannons — the Duffer Zone Chronicles and other works. He blogs at avayshukla.blogspot.com