Supreme Court Defers Hearing on PIL Seeking Uniform SOP for Paper Leak Investigations, Questions Scope of Judicial Intervention
The Supreme Court has deferred the hearing on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the formulation of a nationwide Standard Investigation Procedure (SIP) and time-bound investigation and trial mechanism for public examination paper leak cases. While hearing the matter, the Bench expressed reservations about the broad nature of the reliefs sought, observing that such policy issues may not ordinarily fall within the Court’s domain. Justice P.S. Narasimha orally remarked, “It’s not a matter for us,” indicating the Court’s reluctance to undertake extensive judicial supervision in an area involving legislative and executive policy.
The petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, has been prompted by recurring incidents of question paper leaks, including the alleged NEET paper leak, which the petitioner argues have undermined the constitutional rights of lakhs of students under Articles 14, 16 and 21. It contends that despite the enactment of the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, the existing legal framework lacks essential safeguards such as mandatory timelines for investigation, a uniform investigative protocol, coordinated digital forensic procedures and speedy prosecution of offenders.
The PIL seeks directions to the Union and State Governments to frame a “Standard Questionnaire” and “Special Investigation Procedure” for all paper leak cases, ensuring prompt registration of offences, preservation of digital evidence, coordinated investigation by specialised agencies and completion of investigations within prescribed timelines. It further seeks confiscation of the movable and immovable properties of accused persons and their family members wherever proceeds of crime are established, by invoking laws such as the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, and other financial crime statutes.
One of the most debated prayers in the petition is the request for the Supreme Court to reconsider its landmark decision in Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), which prohibited the involuntary administration of deception detection techniques such as polygraph tests, narco-analysis and Brain Electrical Activation Profile (BEAP) tests. The petitioner argues that scientific and forensic advancements, coupled with the organised nature of paper leak syndicates, warrant a fresh examination of the ruling. Relying on the earlier Constitution Bench decision in State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad, the petition contends that modern investigative needs justify reconsidering the restrictions imposed in Selvi to facilitate identification of the masterminds behind organised examination fraud.
During the hearing, however, the Supreme Court indicated that it is already seized of broader issues concerning examination integrity through pending matters relating to the National Testing Agency (NTA). On the insistence of the petitioner’s counsel, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, the Bench agreed to defer the matter for about a week so that it may be considered after hearing the pending NTA-related cases. The Court stopped short of issuing notice or expressing any opinion on the merits of the petition.
The PIL also urges the Court to recommend legislative reforms, including mandatory consecutive sentences for convicted paper leak offenders, establishment of specialised investigation units, and a reference to the Law Commission of India to study international best practices in tackling examination fraud. While the Supreme Court has yet to decide whether it will entertain the petition, the case has reignited debate on the adequacy of India’s legal framework to combat organised paper leak syndicates and safeguard the credibility of competitive examinations affecting millions of students across the country.
