<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.7" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-7.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>When the Protector Becomes the Prosecutor - The Indian Supreme Court’s NCERT Affair</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" type="personal" usage="primary" xlink:href="(orcid)0000-0003-4596-3911">
    <namePart>Jain, Anmol</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm type="text">Author</roleTerm>
    </role>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
    </role>
    <nameIdentifier>(orcid)0000-0003-4596-3911</nameIdentifier>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource/>
  <genre authority="rdacontent">Text</genre>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xx#</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <dateIssued encoding="marc">2026</dateIssued>
  </originInfo>
  <originInfo eventType="publisher">
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="text"/>
    </place>
    <publisher>Verfassungsblog</publisher>
    <dateIssued>2026-03-12</dateIssued>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">eng</languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <form authority="marccategory">electronic resource</form>
    <form authority="marcsmd">remote</form>
    <form type="media" authority="rdamedia">Computermedien</form>
    <form type="carrier" authority="rdacarrier">Online-Ressource</form>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract displayLabel="Summary">On 26 February 2026, the Supreme Court of India, acting on its own motion (suo motu) and without any petitioner before it, issued a remarkable order. It banned a Class 8 social science textbook published by the National Council for Educational Research and Training, directed the physical seizure of all copies in circulation, ordered the removal of the book from every digital platform, threatened its authors with criminal contempt proceedings, and barred classroom instruction based on its contents — all in response to a chapter that described corruption in the judiciary and case backlogs as institutional challenges.</abstract>
  <accessCondition type="use and reproduction">CC BY-SA 4.0</accessCondition>
  <note type="statement of responsibility">Jain, Anmol</note>
  <subject>
    <topic>Indian Supreme Court</topic>
  </subject>
  <classification authority="ddc" edition="23">342</classification>
  <location>
    <url displayLabel="raw object" usage="primary display">https://verfassungsblog.de/the-indian-supreme-courts-ncert-affair/</url>
  </location>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <titleInfo>
      <title>Verfassungsblog</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <identifier type="issn">2366-7044</identifier>
    <name>
      <namePart>Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH</namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="doi">10.59704/f991707ca2899a1b</identifier>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">260312</recordCreationDate>
    <recordIdentifier source="DE-Verfassungsblog">10.59704/f991707ca2899a1b</recordIdentifier>
    <recordOrigin>Converted from MARCXML to MODS version 3.7 using MARC21slim2MODS3-7.xsl
				(Revision 1.140 20200717)</recordOrigin>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
