Corruption needs to Be Struck Down, Not Merely Taught
Gustakhi Maaf Haryana – Pawan Kumar Bansal
By our enlightened reader Satish Mehra
Corruption Needs to Be Struck Down, Not Merely Taught
Recently, a controversy erupted across the country over a newly published Class 8 Social Science textbook, “Social Science – Exploring Society: India and Beyond (Part-1)”, brought out by National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). In the chapter titled “Role of the Judiciary in Our Society,” certain references related to “corruption in the judiciary” drew objections. The matter ultimately reached the Supreme Court of India. The Court ordered a stay on the concerned portions and indicated that it was necessary to examine on what basis and under whose recommendation such content had been included. This episode is not merely about a textbook; it raises larger questions of institutional accountability and academic balance.
NCERT textbooks ordinarily go through a multi-layered process involving subject experts, academicians, and reviewers. If the highest court of the country has to intervene in the content of a school textbook, it reflects the seriousness of the issue. However, the larger question remains: can a deep-rooted problem like corruption be eliminated simply by teaching about it in textbooks?
Corruption in India is not a new phenomenon. It is an entrenched issue connected not just to individual misconduct but to systemic complexities within governance and administration. At the national level, official crime data is published by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). According to the latest available report under the Prevention of Corruption Act (amended in 2018), more than 4,100 major corruption cases were registered across the country in a single year.
A closer look at state-wise figures reveals that certain states report relatively higher numbers. For example, Maharashtra recorded over 900 cases; Rajasthan around 500; Karnataka more than 400; and Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu between 300 and 350 cases each. In addition, the figures recorded by respective State Anti-Corruption Bureaus may vary. A large number of these cases are “trap cases,” where officials are caught red-handed while accepting bribes. Thousands of other cases remain under investigation or pending trial, indicating that corruption is not an isolated occurrence but a widespread structural challenge.
The situation in Haryana also deserves attention. Corruption-related cases in the state are investigated by the Haryana Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). During 2024–25, the Haryana ACB reportedly registered more than 250 cases, including approximately 140–150 trap cases in which government officials were caught accepting bribes. The remaining cases involved complaint-based investigations and disproportionate assets. While these actions indicate administrative vigilance, they also demonstrate that corruption continues to persist within the system.
Globally, India’s position presents a mixed picture. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index released by Transparency International, India ranks around 91st among nearly 180 countries. This suggests that although certain reforms have been undertaken—such as digital payments, Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT), and online tendering systems—much stronger and more consistent measures are still required.
The most severe impact of corruption is on social inequality. When funds meant for welfare schemes are siphoned off midway, the poor and marginalized are deprived of their rightful benefits. Influential individuals manipulate rules, while ordinary citizens struggle to secure basic entitlements. Thus, corruption widens the gap between the rich and the poor and undermines social justice.
It is important to understand that eliminating corruption is not the responsibility of students. Students should indeed be encouraged to adopt a scientific temperament, ethical values, and constitutional principles. However, the burden of systemic reform cannot be placed upon them. Teaching about corruption may increase awareness, but eradication demands decisive action from the government and administrative machinery.
The government must act impartially and firmly. Investigative agencies must function independently; cases must be disposed of within a defined timeframe; and strict punishment must follow conviction. Confiscation of illegal assets and disqualification from public office can serve as effective deterrents. If punishment is delayed, fear diminishes, and the audacity to engage in corruption increases.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in the NCERT textbook issue has made it clear that accountability extends beyond administration into the education system as well. If any academic content lacks balance, it must be corrected; if procedural lapses occurred, they must be investigated. Yet the more pressing concern is whether equal seriousness is being shown in combating real-life corruption.
The strength of a democracy rests on transparency, fairness,and accountability. If we truly aspire to build an equitable and just society, corruption must not be confined to textbook discussions. It must be confronted decisively and effectively.
The message is clear: corruption does not need to be merely taught—it needs to be struck at its roots. Teaching students only about the mechanics of corruption may inadvertently make them more aware of its techniques rather than its eradication. True national interest, social justice, and the preservation of democratic values demand that corruption be uprooted firmly and permanently.
khabre junction