Are cartoons in NCERT textbooks correct? Supreme Court asks retired judge for review

Image used for representational purposes. File | Photo credit: The Hindu

The Supreme Court on Friday (May 22, 2026) asked a former panel headed by a high court judge to review cartoons published in National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbooks after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pointed out that “a textbook is not a place where you use cartoons”.

After criticism, NCERT restored the original image of ‘Dancing Girl’ in the school textbook

Mr. Mehta, representing the Union government, appeared before a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and raised an objection regarding cartoons he happened to come across in “some” NCERT textbooks.

Mr. Mehta’s objection raised the question of whether children should be exposed to satire or parody through their textbooks.

The Solicitor General said there was no objection “per se” to the cartoons, but those printed in school “were in context” and textbooks would see children at an “impressive age”.

“Perhaps it is not right to have these cartoons. A textbook is not a place where you use cartoons,” argued Mr Mehta.

The top lawyer raised the issue of caricatures depicted in NCERT textbooks during a suo motu hearing on the recent controversy over the content of the Class 8 Social Science textbook on Judiciary. In February, the court prima facie concluded that the content was intended to “defame the Indian judiciary”. She launched contempt proceedings and ordered a “plain and total” ban on the textbook.

On Friday (May 22, 2026), the Bench agreed with Mr. Mehta that the correctness of the cartoons published in the textbook should be entrusted to a government-appointed committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice Indu Malhotra. The committee, whose members were senior advocate KK Venugopal and prof. Prakash Singh, Vice-Chancellor, Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University, is collaborating with the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal to shape the curriculum of legal studies for class 8 and beyond. At that time, NCERT also reconstituted the National Syllabus and Study Materials Committee.

In the past, the Court emphasized that the “art of satire” should not be left to the judgment of “touchy-feely and hypersensitive individuals” but to a reasonable person who can see the lighter side.

2020 Court Judgment in Indibily Creative (P) Ltd. v. State of West Bengal described satire as having “the unique ability to make a point quickly and clearly and to facilitate understanding in a way that other forms of communication and expression often do not”. The court argued that stifling free speech stifles debate and threatens community stability.

Published – 22 May 2026 15:58 IST