Cheque Bounce Cases Should Ordinarily Be Sent To Mediation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Calls For Mediation In NI Act Matters 138 NI Act | Belated Plea Of Forged Signatures Cannot Be Used To Delay Trial: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Handwriting Expert Sections 332 & 333 IPC | Lawful Discharge Of Duty Must Be Proved, Mere Status As Public Servant Not Enough: Allahabad High Court Bus Conductor Accused of Assaulting Traffic Inspectors Custody With Biological Mother Cannot Ordinarily Be Treated As Illegal Detention: Delhi High Court Refuses Habeas Corpus For Return Of Child To Canada Foreign Custody Orders Must Yield To Welfare Of Child: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enforce Canadian Return Order Through Habeas Corpus Possible Criminal Racket Luring Young Girls Through Self-Proclaimed Peers And Tantriks Must Be Examined: J&K High Court Orders Wider Judicial Scrutiny Nomenclature Cannot Determine Constitutional Entitlement: Supreme Court Strikes Down Exclusion Of ‘Academic Arrangement’ Employees From Regularisation Testimony Of Related Witnesses Cannot Be Discarded Merely For Relationship: Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction 149 IPC | Presence In Unlawful Assembly Is Enough For Murder Liability”: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Directly Recruited Engineers Entitled To Seniority From Date Of Initial Appointment Including Training Period: Supreme Court Section 32 Evidence Act | If There Is Even An Iota Of Suspicion, Dying Declaration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Framing A Case On Public Perceptions And Personal Predilections Ends Up In A Mess: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal In Alleged Parricide Arson Case When Oppression Petition Is Pending, Courts Must Ensure The Subject Matter Does Not Disappear Before Adjudication: Supreme Court Orders Status Quo In ₹1000 Crore Redevelopment Dispute Parties Cannot Participate In Arbitration And Later Challenge The Process Only After An Unfavourable Outcome : Supreme Court ICSID Clause Is Only A Fail-Safe Mechanism, Not A Restriction: Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Tribunal’s Constitution In MCGM Dispute Passive Euthanasia | 'Right To Die With Dignity Is An Intrinsic Facet Of Article 21': Supreme Court Permits Withdrawal Of Life Support Medical Board Must Record Reasons Before Denying Disability Pension To Armed Forces Personnel: Kerala High Court Grants Disability Pension To Air Force Corporal 138 NI Act | Directors Cannot Be Prosecuted If Company Is Not Made Accused: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Cases Broad Daylight Removal of Goods by Known Creditors Is Not Theft: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Shopkeeper’s Insurance Claim Reservation Cannot Freeze Private Land Forever – Lapse Under Section 127 MRTP Act Operates Automatically: Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Transfer On Marriage Cannot Defeat Helper’s First Right To Promotion: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Anganwadi Helper’s Promotion Where Accusations Are Prima Facie True, Statutory Bar Under Section 43D(5) UAPA Operates; Bail Cannot Be Granted: Jharkhand High Court Bomb Hurled At Head Of Victim Shows Clear Intention To Kill: Kerala High Court Upholds Life Sentence In Kannur Political Murder Case Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment

"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