TANVI SARWALversusCENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND . ORS.

                        [2015]7 S.C.R. 780


A                         TANVI SARWAL
                                  v.
     CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND
                     . ORS.
B               (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 298 of 2015)
                           JUNE 15, 2015
            [R. K. AGRAWAL AND AMITAVA ROY, JJ.]
c          Education:

          Pre-Medical and Pre-Dental Entrance Test 2015-16
  - Held by Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) -
  Use of unfair means and malpractices through electronic
0 gadgets and devices, at the behest ofa syndicate for unlawful
  gang - Writ petitions u/Arl. 32 in public interest, seeking
  annulment of the examination and direction for holding fresh
  examination - Plea of State and CBSE that holding of fresh
  examination would upset the time-schedule fixed by
E Supreme Courl in Mridual Dhar and Priya Gupta cases and
  that instead of scrapping the whole examination, action may
  be taken against the already identified beneficiaries of the
  malpractice - Held: The examination suffers from an
  infraction of its expected requirement of authenticity and
                            ~""''·· .;
F credence - In view of the disclosures in the investigation, the
  benefit of the malpractice has been availed by several
  candidates though only 44 candidates have been identified
  - In order to secure and sustain the confidence of the public
  in general and student fraternity in parlicular, in the system,
G the examination cannot be sustained - Annulment of the
  examination in view of the fact that it is vitiated due to use of
  deceitful means, would not be repugnant to the renderings
   in Mridua/ Dhar and Priya Gupta cases- CBSE directed to
   hold the fresh examination within a period of four weeks.
H
                                 780
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 781
             EDUCATION AND ORS.

      Allowing the writ petitions, the Court               A

       HELD: 1. In view of the revelations in course of
the investigation, it is apparent that the examination
indeed have been exposed to a deep rooted conspiracy
of a gang of persons who with the aid of electronic        B
devices have been able to access the beneficiary
candidates with the answer keys during the test so as
to enable them to solve the question paper. This, as the
investigation discloses, was on the basis of a
premeditated design and the benefit has been extended      C
on monetary consideration. These, are gathered from the
status reports submitted before this Court from time to
time, the authenticity whereof has not been questioned.
The disclosures, are startling and alarming as well. The
status reports disclose involvement of persons who had     D
been similarly involved in such a strategy and are the
beneficiaries thereof. The investigation in the cases
registered has progressed well and having regard to the
magnitude of the exercise involved, some more time
would be necessary to complete t~e same in all respects.   E
[Para 13] [807 -D-G]
                              ,,.. r
       2. The disclosures in the investigation suggest
that the benefit of answer key has been availed by several
candidates taking the examination, c
                                       by illegal means. F
Though as on date, 44 such candidates have been
identified, having regard to the modus operandi put in
place, the numbers of cell phones and other devices
used, it is not unlikely that many more candidates have
availed such undue advantage, being a part of the G
overall design and in the process have been unduly
benefited qua the other students who had made sincere
and genuine endeavours to solve the answer paper on
the basis of their devoted preparation and hard labour. H
782         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2015] 7 S.C.R.

A In view of the widespread network, that has operated,
  as the status reports disclose and the admission of the
  persons arrested, including some beneficiary
  candidates, and in view of the strong possibilities of
  identification of other candidates as well involved in
B such mal practices, the examination has become a
  suspect It is necessary, for all the role players in the
  process, to secure and sustain the confidence of the
  public in general and the student fraternity in particular,
  in the system, by its unquestionable trustworthiness.
C There cannot be any compromise with these imperatives
  at any cost. [Para 15] [808-C-F, G-H; 809-A]

              3. In view of the status reports, it is held that the
      examination involved, suffers from an infraction of its
D     expected requirement of authenticity and credence.
      Every examination being conducted by a human agency
      is likely to suffer from some shortcomings, but deliberate
      inroads into its framework of the magnitude and the
      nature, as exhibited, in the present case, demonstrate a
E     deep seated and pervasive impact, which ought not to
      be disregarded or glossed over, lest it may amount to
      travesty of a proclaimed mechanism to impartially judge
      the comparative merit of the candidates partaking therein.
F     If such an examination is saved, merit would be a
      casualty generating a sense of frustration in the genuine
      students, with aversion to the concept of examination.
      The possibility of leaning towards unfair means may also
      be the ultimate fall out. Even if, one undeserving
G     candidate, a beneficiary of such illegal machination,
      though undetected is retained in the process it would
      be in denial of, the claim of more deserving candidates.
      At the present, the examination stands denuded of its
      sanctity as it is not possible to be cleansed of all the
H     participating beneficiary candidates with certainty.
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 783
             EDUCATION AND ORS.

Therefore, the examination cannot be sustained. [Para A
17] [809-H; 810-A-E]
       4. In the extraordinary fact situation, where the
examination involved is vitiated to the core, by use of
deceitful means and measures to benefit some, the B
consideration of departure from time-schedule fixed by
this Court in Mridul Dhar case and Priya Gupta case, per
se would not be a wholesome justification to sustain the
otherwise tainted exercise. The annulment of the
examination and the consequences to follow, in the C
singular facts and circumstances of the cases, would
not in any way be repugnant to the renderings of this
court in Mridul Dhar and Priya Gupta cases. [Para 18]
[810-H; 811-A, C]
                                                             D
      5. In the attendant facts and circumstances, the
Board is directed to hold the examination within a period
of four weeks. It would take the necessary follow up
steps in coordination with all other institutions involved .
in the admission process and space the intermediate E
phases in the same pattern of the time-schedule as
mandated by this court in Mridu/ Dhar and Priya Gupta
cases. [Para 19] [812-G-H; 813-A]

  Mridu/ Dhar vs. Union of India (2005) 2 SCC 65: 2005       F
  (1) SCR 380; Priya Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh
  (2012) 7 SCC 433: 2012 (5) SCR 768- referred to.
                    Case Law Reference
2005 (1) SCR 380            referred to.           Para 14   G
2012 (5) SCR 768            referred to.           Para 14
      CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil)
No. 298 of2015.
        Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.       H
784       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A                    .WITH

           W. P. (C) Nos. 299, 305 and 325 of 2015
               . ..,,
         Ranjit Kumar, SG, Pinky Anand, ASG, Jaideep Gupta,
  RaviGupta,AjayBansal,AAG, PrashantBhushan, Md. Naved,
8
  Anil Subhas, Syed Abdul Haseeb, Sanjay Sharma, Vaibhav
  Choudhary, Pusshp Gupta, Puja Anand, Bharat Sangal,
  Devendra Singh, Dr. Sushi! Balwada,Anant K. Vatsya, Shahid
  Ali Rao, Tara Chandra Sharma, Neelash Sharma, Rupesh
c Kumar, Gaurav Sharma, Amandeep Kaur, Prateek Bhatia,
  Rekha Pandey, Ajay Sharma, Karan Seth, R. S. Nagar, W. A
  Qadri, D. S. Mahra, Gaurav Yadava, Sanjay Kumar Visen for
  the appearing parties .
              . 1: L
           The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
D
           AM~TAVA ROY, J.          1. All these Writ Petitions,
   analogously heard, register a challenge to the All India Pre-
   Medical and Pre-Dental Entrance Test, 2015 (hereinafter
   referred to as Test/Examination) held on 03.5.2015 under the
E aegis of the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi
   (for short hereinafter referred to as "CBSE/Board") having been
   perceived by the petitioners to have been irreversibly vitiated
   by the use of unfair means and malpractices through electronic
F gadgets and devices facilitating the illegal and unfair access
   to 90 answer keys during the examination conducted on
   03.5.2015 to the beneficiary candidates of such corrupt design
   at the behest of a syndicate for unlawful gain. Whereas the
   petitioner in Vv.P.(Civil) No. 325/2015 has introduced himself
G to be a soeial·activist and a reformer claiming to espouse a
   public caute;the others registering the impugnment, are the
   candidates who have taken the examination and apprehend
   that not only they but also others who are similarly situated and
   have put in sincere and hard labour would therefore be unfairly
H. out perforrmtd by those availing the advantage of the pilfered
                 .   "
  TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 785
        EDUCATIONANDORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.)

answer keys provide by a group of operators by m·isusing the A
information technology.

        2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
                                                        l]l1


         3. The skeletal facts outlining the factual conspectus B
 would be briefly narrated so as to better comprehend the issues
 seeking adjudication.
         4. The CBSE had issued an admission notice in the
 month of November 2014 intimating that the All India Pre-
 Medical/ Pre-Dental Entrance Test for the Academic Session c
 2015-16 would be held on 03.5.2015. The examination was
 to consist of one paper of 180 objective type questions from
 Physics, Chemistry and Biology (Botany & Zoology) and of
 duration of three hours from 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. As a
 matter of record, the test/examination was to be conducted D
 for 15% All India Quota Seats and was to be gover~d by the
 Rules and Regulations in that regard framed by the Ministry of
 Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India from time to time.
The CBSE has been conducting such examination and
declaring the results thereof and thereafter providing the merit E
list to the Director General of Health Servlces and the
participating States/Universities/Institutions in order to facilitate
their counseling/admissions. Some States/Universities/
Institutions have also been voluntarily participating in the
examination for using the merit list prepared for admission in F
the Medical/Dental Colleges against Seats under their control.
Admittedly, the counseling of the successful ciandida~s under
15% quota seats is conducted by the Director General of Health
Services (for short also hereafter referred to DGH~...and the
counseling for admission to seats for the other paf!i9ipating G
States/Universities/Institutions is conducted by their respective
authorities.                                            ... ,\,1
                                                    'r'il   .   j

       5. As scheduled, the examination was held on
03.5.2015 between 1o.oo a.m. to 1.00 p.m. and mdrethan six H
786       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A lakh candidates did take part therein. The examination was
  held in 1050 centers all over the country. ·immediately thereafter
  on 04.5.2015, news reports started surfacing in many dailies
  disclosing that 90 answer keys had been transmitted to the
  candidates during the examination, in consideration of Rs.15
B to 20 lakhs and that Rohtak Police had meanwhile arrested 7
  persons including 2 doctors and one MBBS student for
  conspiring to effectuate the said plot. Reference was also
  made to the disclosures in the investigation, to the effect that
  the arrested individuals in collusion with others had arranged
C for supplying vests fitted with SIM card etc. apart from Bluetooth
  device to facilitate transmission of answer keys through such
  appliances to the users thereof. It was mentioned, that the
  same gang had been involved in the leakage of AllMS Medical
  Examination in the year 2012 by applying the same modus
0
  operandi. Contending that the revelations in the investigation
  underway, did demonstrate the use of such unfair and illicit
  means thus vitiating the examination as a whole, denuding it
  of its credibility and sanctity, the petitioners have sought to
E invoke the jurisdiction of the Court under Article 32 of the
  Constitution of India to annul the examination. The necessity
  of holding a fresh examination has been emphasized, stating
  that in terms of the time schedule fixed by this Court, the results
  in the examination were to be declared by 5.5.2015 to be
F followed by the first counseling of All India quota seats, to be
  completed by 30.6.2015 and second counseling by 8.8.2015.
  That the academic session as per the time schedule was to
  commence on 1.8.2015 and that no student could be admitted
  to the course after 30.9.2015 was underlined as well.
 G
           6. Having regard to the gravity of the im~utations made
   and the prime facie materials furnished with the petition in
   W.P.(Civil) No. 298/2015, this Court issued notice on 18.5.2015
   directing dasti service on all the respondents. The other Writ
 H Petitions gradually got tagged having regard to the
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 787
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVA ROY, J.]

identicalness of the issues involved. On 21.5.2015, after           A
hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a
consideration of the status report dated 20.5.2015 submitted
by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak, Haryana with regard
to the progress of the investigation in the matter, this Court,
feeling the urgency, required the police to complete the            B
investigation at the earliest and directed submission of the
next status report by 26.5.2015. On a perusal of the next status
report dated 26.5.2015, this Court by its order of the same
date, directed the investigation to proceed and ordered that
the cases be listed on 3.6.2015. The police was required to         C
file further status report by then and try to complete the
investigation meanwhile. On 3.6.2015, on a consideration of
the status report dated 2.6.2015 filed by the S.P., Rohtak,
Haryana and noticing the progress made and the materials            D
collected in support of the allegations and being of the view
that all the beneficiaries of the stratagem were yet to be
identified, on balancing the equities, this Court directed that
further steps in examination process be kept in abeyance till
the next date i.e. 10.6.2015. On the prayer made on behalf of       E
the CBSE so as to enable it to file its affidavit, the hearing of
the petitions was postponed till 12.6.2015. The interim restraint
was extended.

       7. Apt it would be, before adverting to the pleaded F
assertions on behalf of the CBSE to extract the relevant
excerpts of the status reports dated 20.5.2015, 25.5.2015,
2.6.2015 and 11.6.2015 submitted by the investigating agency
so as to mark the progress in the inquisition, facts unearthed,
arrests made and also the extent of identification of the G
beneficiaries arrested by the police till date.

RELEVENT EXTRACTS FROM THE STATUS RESPORTS
DATED 20.5.2015, 25.5.2015, 02.6.2015AND 11.6.2015
                                                                    H
788       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 - [2015]7S.C.R.


A 20.5.2015:
             ')

       "1. T~at on 03.5.2015, a secret information was received
      from ~Jl informer that some persons namely Bhupender
       S/o Sh. Satpal Rio Gudhana, District Bhiwani, Haryana,
B      Rajes·r S/o Sh. Urned Singh R/o Gaddhi Kheri, District
       Rohfy:lk, Haryana, Sanjeet S/o Sh. Ramkishan Rio Basant
      Vihar, District Rohtak, Haryana and Ravi S/o Sh. Gorakh
      Sing~f;Vo Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh are involved in
      leakage of answer key or question paper of AIPMT Exam
c     and its circulation to candidates in lieu of monetary gain
      and WQO are moving around in Swift Car No. HR-12R-
      555~1in Rohtak. After receiving the information, raids
      were conducted by the police near examination centres.
      During checking a car bearing No. HR-12R-5552_ came
D     from the Delhi byepass to Jhajjar Road. Rohtak and on
      checking the car. four persons were found sitting in the
      ~During verification, the person who was driving the
      Swift Car No. HR-12R-5552 disclosed his identity as Dr.
      Bhupender Singh (BDS) S/0 Sh. Satpal Rio Gudhana,
E     District Bhiwani, Haryana and his mobile NO.
      9992472959 was checked and answer key of code 'G'
      of AIPMT question paper i.e. 23331* 11431* 23432*
      33214* 24214* 44233* 12131* 33142* 34133* 34432*
      34234*41124*31234*31313*44444*24001*31222*
F
      42121* 1365E* 222* 142* 9342341* 23222* 32341*
      4324,4~ 43114* 21224 was found in his mobile and the
      message of said key was also forwarded at 12.51 PM
      on 03.5.2015 to mobile number 7409770216 and at
      12.5~ P.M to mobile number 8397804478. Similarly as
G
      per re.cord, answer key of cod 'F' of AIPMT exam 2015
      was also transmitted from mobile number 9996668824
      (used &_recovered from accused Dr. Sanjeet) to mobile
      number 9899089958 (used by Mr. Gautam student of
H     MBBS,from Ujjain. Madhya Pradesh) at 12.33 PM
TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 789
      EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

  through Whatsapp. It is pertinent to mention here that         A
  timing of transmitting of answer key to other candidates
  of different states can only be ascertained after the arrest
  of main accused i.e. Roop Singh Dangi. Furtlier after his
  arrest the exact point of leakage of AIPMT exam question
  paper could be ascertained. During verification of the         B
  other three persons sitting on rear seat of Swift'Car, their
  identity was known as Rajesh (MA, MEd qualifi~d person)
  S/o Sh. Urned Singh R/o Gaddhi Kheri DistricfRohtak,
  Haryana, Sanjeet (BOS Doctor) S/o Sh. Ramkishan Rio
  Basant Vihar, District Rohtak, Haryana and Ravi (Student       c
  of MBBS from PGIMS. Rohtak) S/o Sh. Gorakh'Singh RI
  o Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. During checking of Ravi
  (Student of MBBS) a carton containing three vests of
  gents (two black colour and one grey colour) arid three
                                                                 D
  lady vest (white colour) were found. All the above said
  vests were tagged with micro SIM devices, five Bluetooth
  devices were also recovered· from the possession of
  Ravi (Student of MBBS from PGIMS, Rohtak), five data
  cables were recovered from the possession of Sanjeet           E
  (BOS Doctor) and one wrist watch consisting spy camera
  including data cable was recovered from the possession
  of Rajesh (MA, Med qualified person). The entire
  recovered articles were taken in possession by the Police
  officer through recovery memo. On finding that answer          F
  key had already been leaked and transmitted to different
  mobile numbers prior to end of the exam, the Police
  Officer sent a written report to the Station Hduse Officer
  sent a written report to the Station House Officer, Police
  Station PGIMS, Rohtak and consequently a cai€FIR No.           G
  110 dated 04.5.2015 U/s 420/1208 IPC & 66'i:PActwas
                                                    1
. registered in Police Station PGIMS, Rohtak,' Haryana
  against Bhupender. Rajesh. Ravi and Sanjeet. ('

     2. That during investigation, the accused suffered H
790         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A disclosure statements on which basis police proceeded with
  investigation. Inspector Vijay Singh, lncharge CIA - 2 unit,
  investigating officer of the case produced the four arrested
  accused before the Id. Area Magistrate at Rohtak. On the
  application of the investigating officer, the court of learned area
B magistrate granted four days police custody.

                3. That during interrogation, the accused suffered the
      disclosure statement on 05.5.2015 that about 15/16 days back,
      a meeting was organized by Roop Singh Dangi S/o Ramphal
C      Rio Village Madina, District Rohtak, Haryana at his house in
      OMAX City Rohtak with co-accused namely Sonu @ Ohan
      Singh S/o Daiei Rio Village Gadhhi Kheri, District Rohtak,
      Haryana, Sunny Dahiya S/o Ranbir Singh Rio Kripal Nagar
      Rohtak, District Rohtak, Haryana and Rakesh Guliya. As per
D     disclosure statement of Dr. Bhupender. Rajesh. etc. in the
      meeting it was decided that for qualifying AIPMT exam Rs. 20
      lakhs will be taken from the candidates and the person who
      ropes in such candidates will be given one third of the amount.
      It was also disclosed by the above accused that Roop Singh
E     Dangi will leak theAIPMIT question paper from Behror (Distt.
      Alwar. Rajasthan) and after arranging the answer key, provide
      it to Dr. Bhupender. Ravi (Student of MBBS), Dr. Sanjeet and
      Rajesh through mobile phone. It was also disclosed by Dr.
F     Bhupender and co-accused (Rajesh. Ravi & .Dr. Sanjeet •
      arrested accused) that they contacted one Subhash
      Shrivastav. who runs an electronic gadgets shop in Patel
      Nagar. New Delhi in the name of "SPY SHOP" and told him
      about the whole plan and requested him to supply them
G     undergarments of gents and ladies in which they can fix the
      SIM devices. etc. On this. Subhash Shrivastav. owner of the
      shop stated that this is illegal work. so he will take four times
      the cost of the garments. On this. Rs. 60,000/- for six garments
      were paid to Subhash Shrivastav.
H
  TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 791
        EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVA ROY, J.]

         4.1hat during investigation it is found that on 02.5.2015, A
 Roop Singh Dangi and co-accused Sunny S/o Ranbir Singh
booked four rooms on the ID of Sunny in Shakti Resort, Behror,
District Alwar, Rajasthan. That CCTV camera footage and
relevant documentary evidence were collected and prima facie
it was proved that accused Roop Singh Dangi was present at B
Shakti Resort, Behror, DistrictAlwar, Rajasthan on 03.5.2015
along with master solvers. It is pertinent to mention here that
besides private cars, three buses were used by the accused
Roop Singh Dangi to transport the master solvers/beneficiaries C
from various places to Behror. The statement of Manager of
the Shakti Resort, Behror, District Alwar, Rajasthan, and
another hotel in which accused Roop Singh Dangi and other
exam solvers/beneficiaries stayed has been recorded u/s 161
Cr. P. C. by the investigating officer.
                                                                   D
        That during investigation, till date, it has came on file
that accused Roop Singh and co-accused namely Krishan,
Sunny Dahiya etc. have telephoned several people in different
cities of Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Delhi,
Maharasthra, Odisha and Haryana from several SIM cards from E
Behror. It is pertinent to mention here that Investigating Officer
of the case invoked section 467/468/471 of the iPC in the case
no. 07.5.2015.
*****         *****          *****          *****          *****   F
         During investigation, it was revealed that out of 123
'solved' answers of code "G" found in the mobile set of arrested
accused Dr. Bhupender, 102 answers,.were found correct while
comparing wit1 the answer key provided by the CBSE on their G
official website http://aipmt.nic.in Similarly 42 answers were
found correct out of 50 of solved answer key delivered of Code
"F" by the accused.
****          ****
                             -              ****          ****     H
792          SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (2015) 7 S. C.R.


A                                                           '
          9. That during investigation it came to notice that
   arrested accused Ravi (MBBS Student) was found involved in
   case FIR No. 06 dated 08.1.2012 Under Section 420/1208
   IPC Police Station Crime Branch District Daryaganj, Delhi
   regarding leakage of All India P.G. Medical Entrance
 B Examination -2012. Further another case FIR No. 178 dated
   27.5.2012 Under Section 419/420/468/471/1208 IPC was
   registered in Police Station Shabad Diary, District Outer Delhi
   has been found against accused Ravi for the offence of leakage
   of State Bank of India competition exam. It is pertinent to
 C mention here that in these two cases, accused Ravi had
   leaked the respective exam by similarly using electronic
   gadgets and devices.

      ****        ****          ****            ****           ****
 D        10. That during the course of investigation, on 19.5.2015
   accused Sub hash Shrivastav (owner of spy shop) supplier of
   under garments affixed with electronic gadgets which were
   instrumental in leakage of AIPMT exam 2015 has been
   arrested from Delhi and has been produced before Id. Area
 E magistrate, which has granted 2 days police custody. During
   preliminary interrogation. he has admitted that he sold around
   300 such vests to others just before the exam."

      ****          *****          ****           ****          ****
 F 25.5.2015:

         ****       ****           ****           ****   ****

         "4. That it is suspected that 358 mobile numbers were
 G       used for receiving answer keys of unfairly solved question
         papers of AIPMT-2015 to various mobile phones across
         the country while the exam was being conducted at
         various centres in the country from Behror, DistrictAlwar,
         Rajasthan, where the question papers were solved by
 H       the accused persons. Out of these 358 mobile numbers,
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 793
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

   260 mobile numbers were of other states and remaining            A
   98 mobile numbers belong to the State of Haryana and
   the verification of these 98 SIM card holders is still under
   process.
****           ****           ****           ****           ****    B
        6. That on 25.5.2015, information was received from
Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) regarding
alleged malpractices in the.-AIPMT-2015. The list of unfair
means cases which comprises of a total of 29 cases has been
received and out of these. in21 cases the modus operandi is         C
similar in nature i.e. use of electronic devices with concealed
wiring in the undergarments and in one such case. an FIR No~
 105 dt. 03.5.2015 U/s 420/511/120-B IPC & Section 66 of IT
Act, Police Station Bistupur, District Jamshedpur, Jharkhand
has been found to be registered against three aspirants namely      D
Md. Shabbir Zeya Roll No. 51700365, Shashi Shekar Azad
Roll No. 51700543 and Dhananjay Kumar Yadav Roll No.
51700222. All the three students were caught with vests fitted
with electronic communication devices. It is pertinent to mention
here that as per information received from CBSE, 15                 E
candidates of one examination centre namely Siliguri Model
High School Sr. Sec. Gurung Basti, P.O. Pradhan Nagar,
Siliguri Distt. Darjeeling, West Bengal (Centre 55207) were
caught with vests fitted with electronic devices. It is further     F
submitted that in five cases it was found that the candidates
were found in possession of other electronic devices for
receiving messages. Similarly, another case FIR No. 208/15
has also been registered against studentAnnu Lal Roll No.
54835467 by Lucknow Police, Uttar Pradesh as he was also            G
caught with an electronic device tied on his left hand with
speaker in the ear. All the above aspirants need to be joined
investigation in the instant case as well."
****          '****           ****           ****           ****
                                                                    H
794          SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A 02.6.2015:

      ***"        ****           ****           ****         ****
          "3. That after sincere efforts, accused Nan ha Kumar SI
  o Sh. Meena Parsad, resident of Kushi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh,
B who appeared in AIPMT -2015 was arrested on 29.5.2015.
  During interrogation, he disclosed the name of Sujit S/o. Sh.
  Dud Nath. who also appeared inAIPMT -2015 and there upon
  he was also arrested by the SIT. Two vests of gents tagged
  with micro SIM devices, ear devices, charger and two mobile
C phones of dual SI Ms were also recovered from the possession
  of both the accused Nanha and Sujit. During interrogation, they
  further disclosed that all these items were provided to them by
  one Vijay Yadav. who is a student of MBBS 1st Year in Banaras
  Hindu University, Uttar Pradesh.
D
          4. That during investigation, both the arrested
  candidates disclosed that they had jointly prepared for AIPMT
  -2014 with the said VijayYadav and one Rahul Verma. They
  further stated that Vijay Yadav and Rahul Verma were able to
E successfully qualify AIPMT -2014 by using the same modus
  operandi, i.e. use of electronic devices with concealed wiring
  in the under garments. As a result of it, they could secure
  admission in prestigious Medical Colleges i.e. King George
  Medical College, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh and Banaras Hindu
F University, Uttar Pradesh respectively. Influenced by their
  success in the 2014 examination, the two arrested candidates
  admitted to having met Vijay Yadav and Rahul Verma regarding
  AIPMT - 2015 and it was decided that for qualifying AIPMT -
  2015 Rs. 17 lakhs each will be paid by both of them to Vijay
G Yadav and Rahul Verma. They further disclosed that on
  30.4.2015 they paid token money i.e. Rs. 50,000/- to Vijay
  Yadav, who provided the vests fitted with electronic devices
  and promised to deliver the answer key on the day of
H examination. They further stated that they received answer
  TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY ,];95
        EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

keys during the examination hours through electronic devices. A
which were supplied byVijay Yadav and with the help of answer
key they solved the question paper of AIPMT - 2015. On
30.5.2015. they were produced before the Id.Area Magistrate.
Rohtak. which granted six days police remand.
                                                               B
        5. That it is pertinent to mention here that during
investigation, the accused Nanha and Sujit disclosed that even
in UPPMT -2015 state examination held on 25.5.2015, they
received answer keys from Vijay Yadav by using the same
modus operandi, i.e. use of electronic devices with concealed C
wiring in the under garments.

          6. That on 01.6.2015, during the course of investigation,
  accused Vijay Yadav S/o Sh. Satnarain Yadav (student of
  MBBS from SHU) has been arrested from Village Padrom~               D
  District Kushi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. During interrogation, on
 02.6.2015, he suffered a disclosure st~tement in which he
 stated that he used to prepare for AIPMT entrance exam along
 with Rahul Verma. He further stated that he along with Rahul
 Verma were able to qualify AIPMT - 2014 by using the same            E
 modus operandi, i.e. use of electronic devices with concealed
 wiring in the under garments. He further disclosed that answer
 keys were supplied to them by one Veer Bahadur (friend of
 Rahul Verma) .and he along with Rahul Verma got admission
 in prestigious Medical Colleges. He further stated that this year    F
 he along with Rahul Verma again contacted Veer Bahadur
 regarding AIPMT - 2015 and it was decided that for qualifying
 the AIPMT exam. Rs. 17 lakhs each will be taken from the
 interested candidates and they managed to prepare four
 candidates for the same. They collected original marksheets          G
 of all four candidates as surety. He further admitted that on
 30.4.2015. he provided vests fitted with electronic devices to
·candidates namely Nanah. Sujit. Vinod and Sneh and received
 token money of Rs. 50,000/- each from Nanah and Suit and             H
796          SUPREMECOURTREPORTS                     [2015) 7 S.C.R.


A Rs. 30,000/-each from Vinod and Sneh.

          7. That accused VijayYadavfurtherdisclosed that on
  02/3.5.2015, he went to Shakti Resort at Behror, Rajasthan by
  private bus (which was arranged by main accused Roop Singh
B Dangi). He also admitted that he met the said Veer Bahadur
  at Shakti Resort, Behror, Rajasthan where Roop Singh Dangi
  was already present who provided them new mobile phones
  and SIM cards. He further disclosed that Roop Singh Dangi
  had leaked the AIPMT question papers and supplied the
C answer keys with the help of master solvers. He further stated
  that the solved answer keys were supplied to the candidates
  namely Vinod. Sneh. Nanah and Sujit during the examination
  hours through mobile phone from Behror. Rajasthan. He was
  produced before the Id. Area Magistrate, Rohtak on 02.6.2015,
D which granted three days police remand. Further interrogation
  is going on.

           It is further submitted that, in reference to the DO letters
  written by the answering respondent to the SPs concerned
E regarding verification of 260 suspected mobile numbers.
  report of 50 mobile numbers/SIM cards have been received
  till date. Out of these 50 mobile numbers. 22 mobile numbers/
  SIM cards were found to be registered on fake identities."

F ****              ****                          ****        ****

      11.06.2015:

      ****        ****             ****         ****          ****
           "4. That till date, 44 candidates have been found to be
 G confirmed beneficiaries who were supplied answer key s
   during the examination by the gang through special vests fitted
   with electronic gadgets. The detail of 44. beneficiaries'
   candidates is annexed asANNEXURE R-1. It is pertinent to
   mention here that out of 44 candidates, FIRs, have already
·H
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 797
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

been registered against three candidates in districts               A
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand. Out of the remaining 41 candidates,
21 candidates were joined investigation by the SIT who
admitted to having received answer keys through vests fitted
with electronic devices during the examination hours. Notices
to join investigation have been served upon the remaining 20        B
candidates who ha1*e yet to do so. The above mentioned 44
beneficiaries appeared in the examination at various centres
spread across the country. Out of these, 15 candidates
appeared at Siligudi, District Darjeeling, West Bengal; 11
appeared at Rohtak, Haryana; four appeared at Ajmer,                C
Rajasthan; three appeared at Delhi; three appeared at
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, and one each at Shimla, Himachal
Pradesh; Dehradun, Uttrakhand; Patna, Bihar; Gurgaon,
Haryana; Chandigarh; Bhubaneswar, Odisha; Bagdogra,                 D
District Darjeeling, West Bengal and Nagpur, Maharashtra and
all them were able to secure answer keys through vests fitted
with electronic devices.

****           ****          ****            ****           ****
       6. That from the investigation conducted so far, it has      E
been revealed beyond doubt that the network of this organized
gang was spread across different parts of the countrv.
Beneficiaries Sanjit and Naneh and the gang's intermediary/
handler Vi jay Yadav (MBBS student from SHU) were already           F
arrested from Kushi Nagar, Uttar Pradesh. It is further submitted
that on 07.6.2015, during the course of investigation, one
Parimal Koth Paliwal S/o Sh. Chander Shekhar Paliwal
resident of House No. 389 Gajesh Nagar, Nagpur,
Maharashtra, who owns a consultancy firm in Nagpur,                 G
Maharashtra was also arrested and during interrogation, he
suffered the disclosure statement in which he admitted that he
and his accomplice Abid Ali (2!!.!l year MBBS student in Basant
Dada Pawar Medical College, Nasik, Maharashtra) were able
to successfully deliver answer key to a candidate namely Sahil      H
798         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A S/o Sh. Bhand Kishore Gaddam resident of Bodh Colony, Azad
  Chowk, District Gondia, Maharashtra through the same modus
  operandi. The notices were served upon both the accused to
  join the investigation.

B             7. It is further submitted that in reference to the DO
      letters written by the answering respondent to various district
      SsP regarding verification of 358 suspected mobile numbers
      of beneficiaries, verification reports of 21 Omobile numbers
      have been received till date, the details of which are as under:
c
          44 mobile numbers were found to be registered on fake
  identities.166 mobile numbers were found to be registered
  on genuine addresses and as per the verification reports.
  relatives/wards of 37 out of these 166 mobile number users
o appeared in AIPMT - 2015. Out of these 37 mobile number
  users, incriminating evidence has been found against 17
  candidates I SIM cards holders (confirmed beneficiaries). The
  remaining 20 users need to be joined investigation.The
  verification of remaining 148 mobile numbers is still under
E process.

      -            ****                           *****
            10. During interrogation, accused Vijay Yadav stated
    that he knew two persons namely Vikas and Sumit both
F residents of Prem Market, Gohana, District Sonipat, Haryana
    who are master solvers and who solved the question paper on
  . 03. 5.2015 from Shakti Resort, Behror, Rajasthan. Thereafter,
    on 06.6.2015 accused Vikas S/o Sh. Rishiraj and Sumit S/o
    Sh. Suresh both residents of Ward No. 13, Prem Market,
G Rohtak Gate, Gohana District Sonipat, Haryana were arrested.
    During preliminary interrogation, they disclosed that one Guddu
    of Rohtak, Haryana contacted them before the examination
    and discussed about leakage of question paper of AIPMT -
    2015 and it was also decided that they will be paid Rs. 50.000/
H
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 799
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.J

- each for solving the question paper and they further admitted A
to having received Rs. 10.000/- each as advance money. Thev
also disclosed that on 02.5.2015. the reached Shakti Resort.
Behror. Rajasthan and in the evening they met the main·
accused Roop Singh Dangi who told them that the question
paper will be supplied to them about one hour prior to the start B
of the examination. They further disclosed that main accused
Roop Singh Dangi provided them question paper of AIPMT -
2015at about 10.30 AM and after receiving the question paper
they solved it from Shakti Resort. Behror. Rajasthan and the
answer keys were circulated to candidates across the country." C

-             ****          ****          ****           ****
         8. The CBSE in essence, while contending that there
 had been no omission or lapse on its part, in taking the o
 necessary precautions for making foolproof arrangements, for
 smooth and fair conduct of the examination, has asserted that
 in view of the time schedule fixed by this Court in Mridual Dhar
 Vs. Union of India (2005) 2 SCC 65 and Priya Gupta vs. State
 of Chhatisgarh (2012) 7 SCC 433, the prayer for holding a E
 fresh examination would evidently upset the same and would
 result in formidable delay in all the following stages and
 adversely impact upon the academic session as well as the
prospects of the candidates involved. While iterating that, it
having prepared the answer key of 11.5.2015 there was no F
scope for the same being leaked prior to or on 3.5.2015 from
its hold, the CBSE has stated, that in addition, it had provided
various checks and balances, whereby every candidate in one
examination room had been furnished with different sets of
question papers where not only the sequence of the questions G
was different but even the order of choices of the answers did
vary. It has stated as well that, in order to ensure smooth and
secured conduct of the examination, all necessary authorities
including the Director General of Police/S.P. of Police of all H
800       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A the States and Union Territories had been requested to take
  the necessary steps. That in response to a request, made by
  the investigating agency, it had furnished the requisite
  information, with regard to the question key 1 to 90, has been
  stated. The CBSE has claimed, thatthe answer keys of four
B sets of questions papers have been displayed on its web site
  from 18.5.2015 to 20.5.2015 and the individual OMR images
  of each candidate have also been provided from 21.5.2015
  to 23.5.2015. Accordingly, an opportunity to challenge the
  answer key had been provided to the candidates and their
C objections as received have been finalized by the subject
  experts. It, however, admitted to have been reported of 29
  cases from certain examination centers in the country where
  unfair means were allegedly used in the examination and out
  of those, in 21 cases, candidates have been reported to have
0
  used electronic devices concealed in their vests/
  undergarments. According to the Board, it did forward the
  details of 29 candidates to the investigating agency. While
  pleading that in such a situation, pending the completion of
E the investigation, and identification of the beneficiaries of such
  malpractice, necessary action may be permitted to be taken
  against those already identified only and that the examination
  as a whole ought not to be scrapped in the interest of other
  students, the Board has indicated as well that having regard
F to the magnitude of the exercise to be undertaken, it would
  require at least 120 days to hold a fresh examination and that
  the whole process thereby would be delayed by four to seven
  months thus dislocating the time schedule therefor as fixed by
  this Court:
G
          9. In this pleaded background, the learned counsels for
  the petitioners led by Mr. Jaideep Gupta, Sr. Advocate have
  assertively argued that it being evident from the findings in the
   investigation till this stage, that a countrywide network with a
H preplanned design by a group of unscrupulous persons has
  TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 801
        EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

  successfully made, inroads in the examination.process and A
  has been able to illegally communicate the answer keys to a
 substantial number of candidates through electronic devices,
 the entire process stands defiled beyond repair and thus it
 ought to be nullified forthwith. According to them, with the
 progress of the investigation, the modus operandi has become B
 apparent and the arrest of some of the perpetrators of the
 offence involved and the beneficiaries thereof, warrant
 immediate cancellation of the besieged examination in order
 to sustain the faith of all and sundry in the existing system of
 examination to judge the inter se merit of the participating C
 candidates. The learned counsels have insisted, that having ·
 regard to the strategy applied and the electronic appliances
 used, non-identification of all the beneficiaries cannot be a
 defence to save the examination afflicted by an incurable D
 infirmity and thus a fresh examination is the only alternative in
the attendant facts and circumstances. Having regard to the
 expected sanctity of an examination process, and the nature
 and extent of vitiation by the diabolic and deplorable outrages
disclosed in the investigation till this stage, the beneficiaries E
of the plot even if they remain unidentified, cannot be permitted
to score a march over their counterparts who ar.e-not party to
the fraud and cannot be made to suffer for no fault of theirs,
they maintained.                                     ~r

                                                                   F
         10. Per contra, Mr. RanjitKumarappearing_forthe Union
of India as well as the CBSE has asserted, that the Board
having taken all precautions to hold the examination fairly and
in accordance with the law, it cannot in any view of the matter
be held liable for any lapse. He has urged that, even assuming G
that some beneficiaries of the alleged deceitful operation had
been identified in course of the investigation, these being only
44 in number, the whole process cannot be construed to have
been invalidated thereby. He has argued that in such an
eventuality, having regard to the time schedule fixed by this H
~   .

802           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


    A Court andjp the interest of other six lakh students, at best, the
      results of these identified beneficiaries can be kept withheld
      and the process be allowed to proceed to its logical end. He
      reiterated, abiding by the pleaded .stand of the Board, that
      cancellation of the examination is not called for and that in case
    B it is done, it would require at least four months for the same to
      be held again having regard to the infrastructural and other
      imperatives.

               11. We have extended our anxious consideration to the
    C   averments, the documents laid and the contentious arguments
        advanced. Admittedly, the examination under the scanner had
        been conducted by the CBSE on 03.05.2015. The duration of
        the examination, the type of questions, total marks and the
        mode of assessment of performance, have been referred to
    D   hereinabove. 180 objective type questions were to be
        attempted by the students in the examination. While the test
        was on, as it appears from the status reports submitted before
        this Court by the Superintendent of Police, Rohtak, Haryana,
        a secret information was received that some persons namely
    E   Bhupender S/o Shri Satpal, Rajesh S/o Shri Urned Singh,
        Sanjeet S/o Shri Ramkishan and Ravi S/o Shri Gorakh Singh,
        were involved in the leakage of answer key of the question
        paper oUhe said examination and the circulation thereof to
    F   the candidates, in lieu of monetary gain and that they were
        moving around in a Swift Car No. HR-12R-5552 in Rohtak. In
        course oflhe raids conducted by the police near examination
        centers, they intercepted a car with the above registration
        number on Delhi Byepass Road to Jhajjar Road, Rohtak in
    G   which four persons were travelling. On interrogation, it
        appeared that the car was being driven by Dr. Bhupender Singh
        S/o Shri Satpal and on checking his mobile number
        9992472959, several answer keys were found stored therein
        and further message of such key had been forwarded at 12.51
    H   PM on the same date i.e. 03.05.2015 to two mobile numbers.
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 803
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVA ROY, J.]   "

As per the status report dated 20.05.2015, the answer key of A
the same examination was found to be transmitted from the
mobile number of Dr. Sanjeet, who was also travelling in the
car to the mobile number of one Mr. Gautam, student of MBBS
from Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh at 12.33 PM through Whatsapp.
Investigation followed thereafter and is continuing as on date B
as adverted to hereinabove from time to time, the investigating
agency has submitted status reports on 20.05.2015,
25.05.2015, 02.06.2015 and 11.06.2015, the relevant extracts
wherefrom have already been quoted. A bare perusal of the
said excerpts yields the following salient features:            C

  (a) On verification of the identity of the other occupants
  of the car those were disclosed to be Rajesh S/o Shri
  Urned Singh and Ravi S/o Shri Gorakh Singh, a student
  ofMBBSfrom PGI, Rohtak.                                      D

  (b) On frisking Ravi, a carton containing three~ests of
  gents and three vests of ladies were found to be tagged
  with micro SIM.
                                                               E
  (c) Similarly five Bluetooth devices were discovered from
  the possession of Sanjeet, a doctor.

  (d) One wrist watch consisting spy camera including data
  cables was recovered from the possession of Rajesh.
                                                               F
  (e) The arrested accused persons made disclosures
  indicating that a meeting was organized by•one Roop
  Singh Dangi S/o Ram Pal at his house at Omax City,
  Rohtak in which it was decided that Rs.20 lakh each
  would be taken from the candidates to help them for          G
  qualifying in the examination and that the person who
  would be able to bring such candidates would be
  awarded 1/3 of the amount collected.
  (f) It was disclosed as well that Roop Singh Dangi had       H
804       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A     leaked the question paper from Behror (Dist. Alwar,
      Rajasthan) and after arranging the answer key provided
      it to Dr. Bhupender, Ravi, Sanjeet and Rajesh at their
      mobile phones, to be transmitted to the beneficiaries in
      course of the examination.
B
      (g) It was further disclosed that to actuate this plan one
      Shri Subhash Shrivastav, who runs an electronic gadgets
      shop in Patel Nagar, New Delhi in the name of "SPY
      SHOP", was contacted and after revealing to him the plan
c     he was requested to supply undergarments of gents and
      ladies in which SIM devices etc. can be fixed to, which
      the shop owner agreed, at four times the normal price of
      the garments.

D     (h) On 02.05.2015, Roop Singh Dangi and the co-
      accused Sunny S/o Ranbir Singh booked four rooms on
      the ID of Sunny in Shakti Resort, Behror, DistrictAlwar,
      Rajasthan where, Roop Singh Dangi was present along
      with master solvers. Private cars and buses were used
E     by Roop Singh Dangi to transport the master solvers/
      beneficiaries from various places to Behror.

      (i) Roop Singh Dangi and co-accused namely Krishan,
      Sunny Dahiya etc. had telephoned several people in the
F     cities ofBihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan,
      Delhi, Maharashtra, Orissa and Haryana from several
      SIM cards from Behror.
      0) Out of 123 solved answers of code "G" found in the
G     mobile set of the arrested accused Dr. Bhupender, 102
      answers were correct when compared with the answer
      key provided by the CBSE on their official website.
      Similarly, 42 answers were found correct out of 50 solved
      answer key of Code 'F' delivered by the accused.
H
TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 805
      EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

 (k) Ravi was found involved in a similar malpractice        A
 pertaining toAll India PG Medical Entrance Examination,
 2012 and also relating to State Bank of India Competition
 Examination by using electronic gadgets/devices.

 (I) About 358 mobile numbers have been used, for            B
 receiving answer keys of unfairly solved question papers
 of the examination to be transmitted to various mobile
 phones across the country wh"'re the examination was
 underway.
                                                             c
 (m) Information was received from CBSE with regard to
 29 candidates involved in malpractices in the
 examination out of whom 21 had been found to be using
 the electronic devices concealed in their undergarments.
                                                             D
 (n) 18 such candidates whose names had been
 disclosed in the status report were caught in co1,1rse of
                                                 ,, J

 the examination with electronic devices in their vests.

 (o) Two arrested candidates namely Nanha Kumar S/o
 Shri Meena Parsad and Sujit S/o Shri Dud Nath who           E
 had also taken the examination and from whom vests
 fixed with micro SIM devices together with ea,rCJqevices,
 charger and two mobile phones of dual SIMs were
 recovered, disclosed that all these have been-provided
                                                             F
 to them by one Vijay Yadav, student of MBBS of 1st year
 in Banaras Hindu University, Uttar Pradesh. c;,.

 (p) These candidates further disclosed that Vijay Yadav
 and Rahul Verma have been able to qualify AIPMT, 2014
 examination by using the same modus operandi.               G

 (q) These candidates admitted to have received the
 answer key during the examination though the three
 electronic devices which were supplied by Vijay Yadav
 and that with the help of the answer key they had solved    H
806         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2015] 7 S.C.R.


A        the question paper.

         (r) Vijay Yadav on his arrest did disclose, that he used to
         prepare for AIPMT examination along with Rahul Verma
         and that they were able to successfully qualify inAIPMT-
B        2014 by using the same modus operandi.

        He admitted that he along with Rahul Verma did contact
        Veer Bahadur for AIPMT, 2015 and planned to charge
        Rs.17 lakhs from each candidate to enable them to qualify
c       in the examination. He admitted further to have provided
        vests fitted with electronic devices to the candidates
        Nanha Kumar, Surjit and others.

        He also admitted to have visited Shakti Resort, Behror,
        Rajasthan on 02/03.05.2015 and had participated in the
D
        meeting where Roop Singh Dangi and Veer Bahadur
        were present who provided new mobile phones and SIM
        cards to the persons concerned with the understanding
        that Roop Singh would leak the AIPMT question paper
E       and supply the answer key with the help of master solvers.

        (s) Till date 44 candidates have been found to be
        confirmed beneficiaries in the scheme who have been
        supplied with answer keys during the examination through
        electronic devices installed in their vests.
F
        (t) Out of 358 suspected mobile numbers of the
        beneficiaries, 44 have been found to be registered on
        fake identities, 166 are registered on genuine basis and
        verification with regard to the remaining 148 mobile
G       numbers is under process.

             The names and details of these 45 beneficiaries have
      been furnished in the status report dated 01.06.2015

H            12. The investigating agency in its report has stated in
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 807
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVA ROY, J.]

clear terms that from the disclosures recorded, it is beyond A
doubt that the strategy of providing answer key has_ been
executed by an organized gang with a network spreading over
different parts of the country. The Inspector General of Police,
Haryana who was present with his team, having been granted
the leave, submitted thatthe investigation in full swing is in B
progress and that undoubtedly many more beneficiaries of the
plot would be identified at the earliest. He however could not,
provide a deadline of time by which it could be done and the
ongoing investigation could be completed. He frankly admitted
as well, that in the process it might not be possible to identify C
each and every beneficiary of the malpractice perpetrated.

        13. On a consideration of the revelations in course of
the investigation, we are of the view that the examination indeed
 have been exposed to a cl.eep rooted conspiracy of a gang of       D
persons who with the aid of electronic devices have been able
to access the beneficiary candidates with the answer keys
during the test so as to enable them to solve the question paper.
Th.is, as the investigation discloses was on the basis of a
premeditated design and the benefit has been extended on            E
monetary consideration. These, we hasten to add, are
gathered from the status reports submitted before this Court
from time to time, the authenticity whereof has not been
questioned. The disclosures, to state the least, are startling      F
and alarming as well. The status reports disclose involvement
of persons who had been similarly involved in such a strategy
and are the beneficiaries thereof. We have noted that the
investigation in the cases registered has progressed well and
havirig regard to the magnitude of the exercise involved, we        G
accept that some more time would be necessary to complete
the same in all respects.

       14. Situated thus, with the time schedule fixed by this
Court for completion of the admission process for the 1•1 H
808       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (2015) 7 S.C.R.


A MBBS/BDS courses as per the pronouncements made in
  Mridu/ Dhar vs. Union of India, (2005) 2 SCC 65 and Priya
  Gupta vs. State of Chattisgarh, (2012) 7 SCC 433, there are
  presently two alternative courses, either to segregate the 44
  already identified beneficiary candidates, direct their results
B to be withheld and permit CBSE to proceed with process
  underway or direct a fresh examination by cancelling the
  ongoing exercise.

           15. As has been noticed hereinabove, the disclosures
C in the investigation suggest that the benefit of answer key has
  been availed by several candidates taking the examination,
  by illegal means. Though as on date, 44 such candidates have
  been identified, having regard to the modus operandi put in
  place, the numbers of cell phones and other devices used, it
D is not unlikely that many more candidates have availed such
  undue advantage, being a part of the overall design and in the
  process have been unduly benefited qua the other students
  who had made sincere and genuine endeavours to solve the
  answer paper on the basis of their devoted preparation and
E hard labour. In view of the widespread network, that has
  operated, as the status reports disclose and the admission of
  the persons arrested including some beneficiary candidates,
  we are of the opinion, in view of the strong possibilities of
F identification of other candidates as well involved in such mal
  practices, that the examination has become a suspect. As it
  is, the system of examination pursued over the decades, has
  been accepted by all who are rationale, responsible and
  sensible, to be an accredited one, for comparative evaluation
G of the merit and worth of candidates vying for higher academic
  pursuits. It is thus necessary, for all the role players in the
  process, to secure and sustain the confidence of the public in
  general and the student fraternity in particular in the system by
  its unquestionable trustwq~hiness. Such a system is endorsed
H because of its credibility informed with guarantee of fairness,
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 809
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

transparency authenticity and sanctity. There cannot be any A
compromise with these imperatives at any cost.

        16. Segregation only of the already 44 identified
candidates stated to be the beneficiaries of the unprincipled
manoeuvre11y withholding their results for the time being, in      B
our comprehension cannot be the solution to the problem that
confronts all of us. Not only thereby, if the process is allowed
to advance, it would be pushed to a vortex of litigation
pertaining thereto in the foreseeable future, the prospects of
the candidates would not only remain uncertain and tentative,      C
they would also remain plagued with the prolonged anguish
and anxiety if involved in the ordeal of court cases. Acting on
this option, would in our estimate, amount to driving knowingly
the students, who are not at fault, to an uncertain future with
their academic career in jeopardy on many counts. Further,         D
there would also be a lurking possibility of unidentified
beneficiary candidates stealing a march over them, on the
basis of the advantages availed by them through the underhand
dealings as revealed. Having regard to the fact, that the course
involved with time would yield the future generations of doctors   E
of the country, who would be in charge of public health, their
inherent merit to qualify for taking the course can by no means
be compromised.

        17. As would be available from the status reports, out F
of 123 solved answers of a particular code and retrieved dam
the mobile set of one of the persons arrested i.e. Dr.
Bhupender, 102 answers were found correct on a comparison
with the answer key provided by the CBSE. As referred to
hereinabove, 358 mobile numbers had been pressed into G
service and at least 300 vests fitted with electronic devices
have been used. Having regard to the uncompromising
essentiaiity of a blemish less process of examination involving
public participation, we have no alternative but to hold that the H
810       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2015] 7 S,C.R.


A examination involved, suffers from an infraction of its expected
  requirement of authenticity and credence. We are conscious
  of the fact that every examination being conducted by a human
  agency is likely to suffer from some shortcomings, but
  deliberate inroads into its framework of the magnitude and
B the nature, as exhibited, in the present case, demonstrate a
  deep seated and pervasive impact, which ought not to be
  disregarded or glossed over, lest it may amount to travesty of
  a proclaimed mechani&m to impartially judge the comparative
  merit of the candidates partaking therein. If such an
C examination is saved, merit would be a casualty generating a
  sense of frustration in the genuine students, with aversion to
  the concept of examination. The possibility of leaning towards
  unfair means may also be the ultimate fall out. Even if, one
  undeserving candidate, a beneficiary of such illegal
0
  machination, though undetected is retained in the process it
  would be in denial of, the claim of more deserving candidates.
  At the present, the examination stands denuded of its sanctity
  as it is not possible to be cleansed of all the participating
E beneficiary candidates with certainty. We are thus, on an
  overall assessment of the materials on record, left unpersuaded
  to sustain the examination. We must observe that till this stage
  of the investigation, no conscious lapse or omission on the
  part of the Board, contributing to the otherwise appalling
F mischief has surfaced.
          18. Conscious are we that, as a consequence, the All
  India Pre-Medical and Pre-Dental Test 2015 would have to be
  annulled, thereby disturbing the time schedule fixed by this
G court in Mridul Dhar(supra) and Priya Gupta (supra). Though
  we respectfully subscribe to the calendar of dates fixed in these
  cases, more particularly in the textual context thereof, we
  perceive that in the extraordinary fact situation that confronts
  us, where the examination involved is vitiated to the core by
H use of deceitful means and measures to benefit some, the
 , TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 811
         EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

   consideration of departure from the said time schedule per se       A
   would not be a wholesome j4stification to sustain the otherwise
   tainted exercise. The time frame fixed by this court in the above
   cases, in our opinion, was not intended to be inflexibly adhered
   to in the situation of the kind with which we are seised of. The
  schedule of dates was fixed, so as to streamline and discipline      B
  the process of admission by its uniform application. In that
  view of the matter, we are of the understanding that the
  annulment of the examination and the consequences to follow,
  in the singular facts and circumstances of the cases, would
" not in any way be repugnant to the renderings of this court in       C
   Mridul Dhar(supra) and Priya Gupta (supra). The course we
. proposed to embark upon, is the demand of the situation based
  on contemporaneous official records and that facts
  corroborated thereby. The pleadings of the Board, that its           D
  answer key had been prepared on 11.5.2015 and that the same
  for all the four sets of question paper, had been displayed on
  its website from 18.5.2015 to 20.5.2015, along with the
  individual OMR images of each candidate between 21.5.2015
  and 23.5.2015 whereafterthe challenges from the candidates           E
  have been received and have been verified with the subject
  experts, in the teeth of the disclosures in the investigation lack
  in persuasion to save the examination.

         19. We are aware, that the abrogation of the F
 examination, would result in some inconvenience to all
 concerned and that same extra time would be consumed for
 holding a fresh examination with renewed efforts therefor. This
 however, according to us, is the price, the stakeholders would
 have to suffer in order to maintain the impeccable and G
 irrefutable sanctity and credibility of a process of examination,
 to assess the innate worth and capability of the participating
 candidates for being assigned inter se merit positions
 commensurate to their performance based on genuine and
 sincere endeavours. It is· a collectiVl¥challenge that all the role- H
'812       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2015] 7S.C.R.

 A players would have to meet, by rising to the occasion and fulfill
   the task ahead at the earliest, so as to thwart and abort the
   deplorable design of a mindless few seeking to highjack the
   process for selfish gain along with the unscrupulous
   beneficiaries thereof. Though the Board has taken a plea that
 B having regard to the enormity of the exercise to be undertaken,
   the same cannot be redone before four months, we would
   emphasize that this is an occasion where it (the Board) ought
   to gear up in full all its resources in the right spirit, in
 C coordination with all other institutions that may be involved so
   as to act in tandem and hold the examination afresh at the
   earliest. In the course of the arguments, this court was
   apprised that on previous occasions such type of examination
   had been held anew within a period of one month. We have no
   reason to doubt, that all other institutions would not lag behind
 0
   to extend all possible assistance to the Board in its renewed
   endeavour. We are not unaware that in holding the present
   examination as well as in participating in the exercise, all
   genuinely concerned have put in tireless efforts. All these
 E however have been rendered futile by a handful of elements
   seeking to reap undue financial gain by subjecting the process
   to their evil manoeuvres. We have thus no hesitation to order
   that the All India Pre-Medical and Pre-Dental Test stands
   cancelled. The CBSE would now have to hold a fresh
 F examination at the earliest, by complying with all necessary
   and prescribed norms, being mindful of the exigency amongst
   others of the commencement of the academic session which
   presently stands scheduled to be on and from 01.8.2015. We
   direct the Board, in the attendant of facts and circumstances
 G to hold the examination within a period of four weeks from
   today. It would take the necessary follow up steps in the
   coordination with all other institutions involved in the admission
   process and space the intermediate phases in the same
   pattern (understandably with dates changed) of the time
 H
 TANVI SARWAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY 813
       EDUCATION AND ORS. [AMITAVAROY, J.]

schedule as mandated by this court in Mridul Dhar (supra) A
Priya Gupta (supra). Endeavours should be made to minimize
the delay after the examination is held afresh as directed. We
part with the expectation that the CBSE and the other
stakeholder institutions would act in the right sprit in complying
with this order for the paramountcy and trustworthiness of the B
system as well as the sustena.nce of the confidence that it
enjoys. We all owe this, in the minimum, to the society in general
and the student community in particular.
                                   ....
       20. These petitions are thus allowed to the extent C
indicated herein above. The investigating agency would, in
accordance with law, complete its drill with all alacrity and
earnestness. We reiterate, that the references to the status
reports and the contents thereof so far relatable to the cases
in hand have been only in the context of the adjudication of the D
issues involved herein and have to be construed accordingly.

        21. No costs.
Kalpana K. Tripathy                        Writ Petitions allowed.   E