CJI on NEET Paper Leak:
The NEET paper leak controversy has become a significant issue throughout the country. Today, the Supreme Court held a hearing addressing the NEET paper leak, potential re-examination, and other irregularities linked to the examination. Presided over by India's Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra, the session examined several realities regarding the exam and paper leak. CJI DY Chandrachud indicated that all the lawyers representing the petitioners will present arguments for why a re-examination is necessary, and the center will also provide a full schedule of dates. The next hearing, according to the CJI, is scheduled for July 11.
What did the CJI address during the hearing?
The petitioner's lawyers initiated the proceedings by stating that all candidates had applied for NEET on February 9. Subsequently, the examination took place, and results were announced on June 4. The lawyer explained that the examination was conducted on May 5 and that on the eve of the exam, May 4, questions and answers were being circulated on Telegram. The CJI first inquired about when the NTA had announced the exam.
CJI Queries the Basis for Paper Leak from Bank
Upon learning that there was a delay in receiving the papers from the bank, which coincided with the period of the leak, the CJI pressed for a factual basis to support allegations of a leak. He questioned whether it's presumed that a paper leak had occurred and that it had completely undermined the exam's credibility, making it impossible to distinguish between the culpable and the innocent. He also sought evidence for the claim.
CJI's Statement on the Paper Leak
The CJI remarked that if the sanctity of the examination is compromised, an order for re-examination must be issued. If distinguishing between the culprits and the innocents is impossible, then a re-examination is warranted. He commented on the potential widespread leak through electronic means, which could spread like wildfire. The Supreme Court suggested setting up a committee to scrutinize "red flags" throughout the process. Further, the CJI asserted this isn't an adversarial lawsuit, as any decision made will affect the lives of the students. He pointed out that 67 candidates scored 720/720, which was an unusually low ratio. Also, changes in centers were disruptive; for example, a candidate who registered in Ahmedabad and then suddenly moved elsewhere. It's crucial to separate the chaff from the grain to make re-testing possible. The pattern of NEET exams is also to be understood.
Identifying the Perpetrators
The CJI emphasized the breadth of the leak's reach, confirming that it had occurred. The concern now was what difference the leak had made, as it dealt with the lives of 23 million students. These students had prepared for the exam, many traveling significant distances to sit for it, incurring expenses. The CJI then inquired of the lawyers about the number of students whose results were withheld because of the leak and their whereabouts. As of June 23, a re-examination for 1563 students had already taken place. Questions were raised whether the search for the culprits was still ongoing, and whether the students could be traced. Rest assured, the examination would only be canceled if the investigation reveals how and from where the leak originated.
CJI Questions the Government
The CJI asked about the kind of technology available to our cyber forensic team. Could all suspects be tracked down and data compiled? Any steps taken in this examination should prevent future paper leaks. Involving an expert in the case was considered, as self-denial would not be appropriate. Ensuring this prestigious exam remains untainted is critical, as many middle-class families ardently wish for their children to enter the medical field. The CJI sought to ascertain what actions the government had taken, noting that 67 students had achieved a 100% mark. Understanding the marking scheme was crucial.
Next Hearing Scheduled for July 11
Could cyber forensics and data analytics units analyze the data to determine if the entire examination was affected, whether the culprits could be identified, and if so, to potentially issue orders for re-examination for those specific students. Finally, the CJI mentioned that all lawyers representing the petitioners will present arguments on why a re-examination should occur, and the center will provide a complete list of dates. The matter can be heard on Wednesday. The CBI might also file a status report.
