Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

"No Systemic Breach in NEET 2024," Supreme Court Declines to Cancel Exam Despite Paper Leak

02 September 2024 11:55 AM

By: sayum


The Supreme Court of India has refused to cancel the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) 2024, rejecting petitions that sought the exam's annulment due to a question paper leak. The Court, led by Chief Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, determined that the breach did not compromise the examination's overall integrity and that it was feasible to identify the beneficiaries of the fraud. The decision has significant implications for the future conduct of national exams, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the balance between fairness and the practicality of conducting large-scale exams.

NEET 2024, a critical examination for medical college admissions in India, was conducted on May 5, 2024, for over 23 lakh candidates across 4750 centers in 571 cities. Soon after the exam, reports emerged that the question paper had been leaked in Hazaribagh, Jharkhand, and Patna, Bihar. This led to widespread concern and several petitions seeking the cancellation of the exam, alleging that the leak had compromised the examination's fairness. The National Testing Agency (NTA), responsible for conducting NEET, faced scrutiny over its handling of the question papers and the subsequent investigation into the leaks.

The Supreme Court extensively analyzed whether the paper leak in Hazaribagh and Patna had compromised the integrity of NEET 2024 at a systemic level. The Court concluded that while the breach was serious, it was not widespread enough to warrant the cancellation of the entire exam. The Court noted, "The material on record does not substantiate the allegation that there has been widespread malpractice which compromised the integrity of the exam"​.

The Court was satisfied with the ongoing investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which had identified around 155 students from Hazaribagh and Patna as beneficiaries of the leaked papers. The Court emphasized that since it was possible to segregate the tainted candidates from the untainted ones, a re-test was not necessary. "If the investigation reveals the involvement of an increased number of beneficiaries over and above those who are suspects at the present stage, action shall be pursued against every student found to be involved in wrongdoing," the Court stated​.

The Court acknowledged certain procedural flaws in NTA's management of the exam, including the improper distribution of question papers at some centers. However, it was noted that NTA took corrective measures where possible and that these issues did not justify the cancellation of the entire exam​.

Proportionality in Judicial Review: The Court applied the principle of proportionality, considering whether the cancellation of the exam would be a proportionate response to the breach. It was held that canceling the exam would have serious consequences for over two million students and would disrupt the admission schedule for medical courses across the country. The Court observed that "directing a fresh NEET (UG) to be conducted for the present year would be replete with serious consequences for over two million students"​.

Examination Data Analysis: The Court also relied on a data analysis report by IIT Madras, which found no abnormal indications in the NEET 2024 results that would suggest mass malpractice. The report supported the conclusion that the breach was localized and not indicative of a systemic failure​.

The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the NEET 2024 results despite the question paper leak underscores the judiciary's careful consideration of fairness and practicality in large-scale examinations. The ruling sends a strong message about the importance of maintaining the integrity of national exams while ensuring that corrective measures are targeted and proportionate. The ongoing investigation and the Court's directives for future conduct highlight the need for robust security measures in the administration of such critical exams.

Date of Decision: July 23, 2024

Vanshika Yadav v. Union of India & Ors.

Latest Legal News