In my last post [NEET Leak Part – I], I had discussed the futility of the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, [the Act] and how it has no teeth.
This post discusses some alternate provisions in law to prosecute the accused in the NEET paper-leak fiasco. First, however, it is pertinent to think about who we are charging? Are we charging just that “first-person” who accessed the paper? Are we charging every subsequent person who “re-sold” the paper? Further, are we charging the parents/candidates who secured the paper? And Finally, should they be charged similarly?
I think the answer is – everyone should be charged, but not equally.
Why? Steven Levitt, and Stephen Dubner in Freakonomics (2005), taught us that EVERYBODY wants to cheat. And I cannot agree more. The desire to get more, while giving less is intrinsic. So cheating cannot be stopped. I am certain for every exam conducted in India, there have been attempts to “cheat”. Recall the frantic efforts we made to convince teachers to “discuss” important questions one day before the exam? Yes, that was a last-ditch effort at “studying less, yet performing well”, i.e., an attempt to cheat.
My point is, efforts to leak an exam will always be made; it can be easy to shift the blame on parents/candidates, and blame them for the paper-leak, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that no candidate appears in an exam for the love of the exam, or out of the desire to compete. He writes the paper to secure a good university. Leave him with a copy of the question paper – and he WILL cheat.
Do the Parents Escape?
No. Section 317 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita talks about situations where someone either receives, or retains a property which he knows to be stolen property. The effect of this section is huge. It will include all such people who have either “bought” the paper from a “leaker”, or even so much as received the paper. This means, every single parent/cnadidate that secured the paper, or received it can be booked under this section. Punishment – upto three years.
What about the Person that Leaked the Paper?
Most certainly, since the paper was leaked, there must have been someone who committed theft. Now if this was a classic “Three Idiots” kind of theft, this person must have snuck into some office and secured the paper OR on the alternate, he may have stolen the paper off some server. If it is the first case, then that is just theft. [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Sec. 303]
If, say the paper was secured from a server/computer, it also makes out a case under the Information Technology Act, 2000 [Sec. 43/66 IT Act]
Leave a Reply