Overview Senior Advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi addressed the controversy surrounding the new NCERT Class‑8 social‑science textbook, which singled out corruption and case backlogs in the judiciary. Speaking at the second edition of “Justice Unplugged” organised by The Hindu and VIT School of Law, Singhvi argued that the anger was rooted in the selective focus on the judiciary rather than systemic corruption across all institutions. Key Developments Feb 24: Media reports highlight that the NCERT textbook mentions “corruption in judiciary” and case backlogs as major challenges. Feb 25: Singhvi and senior advocate Kapil Sibal state that the content scandalised the entire judiciary. Feb 26: The Supreme Court, led by the CJI , bans the textbook and issues a contempt notice to the NCERT Director and the Secretary of School Education. Singhvi stresses that the real issue is the low judges‑to‑population ratio and delayed appointments. Important Facts The Supreme Court’s suo motu case labelled the textbook’s publication as a possible "serious misconduct" that could amount to criminal contempt . Singhvi highlighted that the judiciary, like other branches, suffers from systemic corruption, but the textbook’s two‑page focus was “out of context”. He warned that such selective criticism could be used to intimidate the courts. Singhvi also invoked landmark judgments – the Kesavananda Bharati and Maneka Gandhi – to illustrate how lawyers shape constitutional evolution. UPSC Relevance Understanding the NCERT controversy touches upon several GS papers: GS1 (education policy and curriculum design), GS2 (judicial independence, contempt powers, and the Basic Structure doctrine), and GS3 (judicial efficiency and judges‑to‑population metrics). The episode also underscores the role of PIL in addressing systemic delays, a recurring theme in UPSC ethics and governance questions. Way Forward Increase the number of judges to improve the judges‑to‑population ratio; ensure timely appointments. Adopt a holistic curriculum that addresses corruption across all institutions, not just the judiciary. Strengthen mechanisms for judicial accountability without compromising independence – e.g., transparent appointment processes. Encourage lawyers to engage in constitutional debates, drawing inspiration from historic figures like Mahatma Gandhi and B.R. Ambedkar . Singhvi’s remarks serve as a reminder that the health of the judiciary is intertwined with broader institutional integrity, and that reforms must be comprehensive rather than symbolic.