AI-Generated, Plagiarised Books in Public Libraries Violate Right to Accurate Information: Madras HC

Madurai: The Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has directed the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) to forthwith register an FIR over the procurement of allegedly bogus and plagiarised books for public libraries in Tamil Nadu, and has asked the Government to suspend the officials involved, freeze the bank accounts of a publisher and others, and withdraw the suspect books from public use. 

A Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice M.D. Sumathi, in an order dated 10 November 2026 in a contempt petition, said that “Actors change, actions do not”, noting that the same court’s 2024 directions on book procurement were passed under one Government, disposed of under another and are now being examined under a third.

The contempt petition (Cont. P (MD) No. 3763 of 2026), filed by Ramasubbu, alleges wilful disobedience of the judgment dated 19.06.2024 in W.P. (MD) No. 10150 of 2019 (S. Krishnan v. The Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education), by the Secretary, Higher Education Department, and the Director of Public Libraries, Ms. R.V. Shajeevana, IAS. By that 2024 judgment, the Court had found a “scam” in procurement of books, such as nationalised and out-of-copyright works republished under different titles and authors’ names, and had directed that procurement follow the Transparent Book Procurement Policy-2024, that tenders and shortlists be published on a dedicated website, and that a committee inquire into the allegations and publish its report, with action against those responsible.

The Bench said that, had those directions been followed, procurement would not have been made from dubious entities such as Agal Vilakku, Sigma and Phoenix publishers. It noted that, on the eve of Diwali, a writer’s social media post on a “colossal fraud” in the procurement of books for a library in Coimbatore had led to a public outcry, that the previous Director of Public Libraries had been relieved, that the DVAC had begun an enquiry and that the existing procurement orders stood cancelled.

Explaining why it took up the matter immediately, the Court said that courts lose respect if their orders remain only on paper, and that it did not want its 2024 directions to remain on paper. It directed the Director of Public Libraries to appear through video conferencing, and recorded that she did not adopt an adversarial stand and that the Additional Advocate General submitted that the Government and the DVAC are actively seized of the matter.

The Court nevertheless held that it was concerned with the majesty of the Court, and that its order had merely echoed the values of the Tamil Nadu Public Libraries Act, 1948 and Rule 18(4) of the 1950 Rules, under which books must be by standard authors and not of “doubtful taste”. It held that the standard applies to non-fiction as well, that the term must be expansively construed, and that a book with dubious content and false narratives, and AI-generated and plagiarised works, would fall within it.

The Court observed that public libraries are an information platform for persons from ordinary backgrounds, who are entitled to presume that the books are authentic. It noted that a book attributing authorship to a renowned economist, found in a Madurai library, had been denounced by him as fake, and that works falsely attributed to the poet Bharathiyar are in the libraries. It held that stacking bogus books by phantom authors breaches the statutory duty under the 1948 Act and also infringes the right to receive accurate information under Article 19(1)(a).

The Court recorded that, although the facts emerged a week earlier, no FIR had been registered. The Public Prosecutor suggested that the Court await the DVAC’s detailed enquiry, but, when asked whether he would deny that a crime had been committed, he answered in the negative. The Bench said that it was obvious that a crime of this “humongous proportion”, involving crores of rupees of public money, could not have taken place without the involvement of Government servants, and that provisions of the BNS and the Prevention of Corruption Act stood attracted.

The Court accordingly directed the DVAC to forthwith register an FIR and directed that the bank accounts of Agal Vilakku Publication and its proprietor and others involved be frozen immediately. It directed the Government to take disciplinary action, including suspension, against the officials involved, and the librarians to take an inventory of the suspect books and make them unavailable to readers. The Director of Public Libraries must give the names and details of the officials responsible for fraudulent procurement during the last two years and more, so that they can be impleaded as contemnors, and must file an affidavit setting out the entire sequence of events, with the persons involved identified “from top to bottom”.

The Court clarified that it was proceeding in the contempt proceeding and, as the Senior Judge of the 2024 Bench is now in the Supreme Court, was hearing the petition under the Chief Justice’s roster arrangement. 

The directions are interim and the allegations remain to be established. The matter was posted for 11 November 2026 at 2.15 pm.

Appearances: For the Petitioner: Mr. K.P.S. Palanivel Rajan, Senior Counsel, for Mr. P.M. Vishnu Varthanan. For the Respondents: Mr. B. Saravanan, Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. M. Kannan, Special Government Pleader, and Mr. John Sathyan, State Public Prosecutor.

Case Title: Ramasubbu v. K. Gopal, IAS, and Another, Cont. P (MD) No. 3763 of 2026