Priya Kumari v. State of Bihar
AIR 2024 (NOC 128) 50
In the High Court of Patna
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case 6034/2023
Before Chief Justice KV Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy
Decided on September 26, 2023

Relevancy of the case: Applying proportionality in cancelling exams for public service due to a digital leak of the exam paper

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 66, 67)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120B, 34)
• The Bihar Conduct of Examination Act, 1981 (Section 10)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• Two candidates filed a writ petition for the cancellation of preliminary examinations and a re-examination to be conducted. Priya Kumari, an unrelated party, filed a PIL as well.
• The preliminary examination had three sessions. The first session, scheduled for December 23, 2022, was cancelled at 11:15 AM because of a question paper leak.
• The authority did not cancel the second and third sessions of the preliminary examination scheduled on December 23, 2022, and December 24, 2022, respectively. Students were handed over mobile phones a minute before the examination ended at 12:14 PM on December 24, 2022. One of the candidates leaked the paper then, and it went viral.
• The Commission filed an FIR against this in the Economic Offences Unit. The Economic Offences Unit opined that the second and third sessions were correctly held.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel argued that the Commission cancelled the first examination session based on allegations of the paper being leaked. However, the entire examination was not cancelled, affecting the paper’s credibility. He relied on the case of Chairman, All India Railway Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar and Sachin Kumar v. Dehli Subordinate Service Selection Board, emphasising fairness when recruiting for a public office. He also argued that more than one sender leaked the paper in the second session.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that the first session was cancelled due to the likelihood of malpractice. However, in the second session, the paper was leaked only a minute before the end, so there was no likelihood of malpractice. Additionally, owing to the scale of the examination, re-conducting it would be a tremendous financial burden for the state. Further, the counsel argued that the Commission’s decision cannot be challenged when the decision-making process is only under judicial review.

Opinion of the Bench

• Examining cases Chairman, All India Railway Recruitment Board case, it is reasonable to only penalise the ones who have indulged in malpractices, instead of cancelling and re-conducting the exam for every student.
• In the instant case, invigilators who handed over phones a minute before the examination ended were at fault, not the Commission. The Commission has penalised them correctly, and this does not indicate connivance.
• The Commission correctly cancelled the first session on December 23, 2022, due to chances of malpractices. It reveals its bona fide intent.
• Additionally, the second and third sessions were rightfully conducted as the papers were revealed only a minute before the examination ended. There are no chances of cheating in such circumstances, applying the proportionality test.
• Regarding the PIL, when the writ petitions concerning the same matter are already pending before a single judge bench having a roster, the PIL is for publicity and amounts to abuse of the court process.

Final Decision

• The bench dismissed the writ petitions and imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on the petitioner.

Kashish Saxena, an undergraduate student at the National Law University, Jodhpur, and Nandita Karan Yadav, an undergraduate student at the National Law Institute University, Bhopal, prepared this case summary during their internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2024.