Section 138 NI Act | Cheque Bounce Complaint Cannot Be Dismissed At Threshold Merely For Non-Production Of Postal Track Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court Departmental Dismissal Based On Identical Evidence Discarded By Criminal Court Amounts To 'No Evidence': Orissa High Court Kerala Lok Ayukta Amendment Upheld: High Court Rules Lok Ayukta Is Not A Court, Its Declaration Can Be Changed To Recommendation Subsidized Industrial Plots Are Meant To Generate Employment, Allottees Must Strictly Adhere To Timebound Project Schedules: Supreme Court Allottees Cannot Keep Subsidised Land Unutilised: Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation Of Piaggio's UP Industrial Plot CAG Audit Cannot Substitute Criminal Investigation To Trace Money Trails: Supreme Court Supreme Court Directs CBI To Probe Arunachal Pradesh Public Contracts, Says Constitutional Violation Not Diluted By Statistics Common Intention Under Section 34 IPC Cannot Be Presumed Merely Because Multiple Accused Participated In A Sudden Fight: Supreme Court Mere Use Of Abusive Word 'Bastard' Does Not Amount To Obscenity Under Section 294(b) IPC: Supreme Court Independent Medical Board's Opinion Crucial To Prevent Harassment Of Doctors In Consent Disputes: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case High Court Can Examine Questions Of Fact Under Section 482 CrPC To Prevent Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Surgeon 'Every Link Must Be Conclusively Established': Supreme Court Acquits Constable In Murder Case, Reiterates Strict Standard For Circumstantial Evidence Murder Conviction Cannot Rest Solely On Voice Identification In Darkness: Supreme Court Acquits Police Constable After 12 Years CCTV Footage Belies Assault Claims: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Neighbours Karta Cannot Gift Entire Joint Family Property To One Coparcener Without Consent; Settlement Void Ab Initio: Madras High Court Fresh Application For Return Of Plaint Barred By Res Judicata Despite Favourable Supreme Court Ruling On Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Registration Of Adoption Deed Not Mandatory For Compassionate Appointment Under Hindu Adoptions Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Insurance Company Cannot Claim Contributory Negligence Without Examining Driver Or Challenging Charge Sheet: AP High Court Accused In Child Pornography Cases Cannot Be Discharged Merely Because Age Of Unidentified Victims Cannot Be Conclusively Proved: Delhi High Court Kerala High Court Denies Relief To Petitioner Suppressing Facts, Orders Enquiry Into Allotment Of Govt Scheme Houses On Puramboke Land Candidate Missing Physical Test For Minor Illness Has No Enforceable Right To Rescheduling: Supreme Court Prolonged Incarceration And Parity Constitute Valid Grounds For Regular Bail: Supreme Court Accused In Cheque Bounce Cases Cannot File Evidence-In-Chief By Affidavit Under Section 145 NI Act: Orissa High Court 138 NI Act | Signing Board Resolution Doesn't Make Director Liable For Cheque Bounce: Supreme Court Written Reply To Show Cause Notice Sufficient, No Right To Personal Hearing For Borrowers Before Fraud Classification: Supreme Court Upholds RBI Master Directions Borrowers Have No Right To Personal Hearing Before Fraud Classification, But Full Forensic Audit Report Must Be Supplied: Supreme Court Pendency Of Matrimonial Dispute With General Allegations Not A Valid Ground To Deny Public Employment: Allahabad High Court Minimum Five Persons Mandatory To Prove 'Preparation For Dacoity' Under Section 399 IPC: Gujarat High Court Suit For Specific Performance Not Maintainable Without Prayer To Set Aside Termination Of Agreement: Madras High Court Trial Court Must Indicate Material Forming Basis Of Charge, Mechanical Framing Of Charges Impermissible: Madhya Pradesh High Court Gated Community Association Cannot Exclude LIG/EWS Allottees, Single Unified Society Mandatory: Telangana High 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