The Centre’s new bill against exam paper leak that will be tabled on Monday, aims for stricter punishment, increasing the minimum jail term and higher fines, and speedy trials by setting up fast track courts that will complete the trial within three months from the filing of the chargesheet.
Overhauling the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, the government will introduce on Monday a series of amendments in the wake of surging protests in Delhi and across the country by students and the Cockroach Janta Party. It allows formation of a Special Task Force, time-bound probe and daily proceedings during trial.
According to the proposed law, anyone resorting to “unfair means and offences”, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not less than “five years but which may extend up to ten years and with fine up to fifty lakh rupees.”
Similarly, the service provider can be punished with fine of ₹5 crores and proportionate cost of examination shall also be recovered from such service provider and he shall also be barred from being assigned with any responsibility for the conduct of any public examination for a period of eight years.
In the current bill, the jail term for unfair means and offences was three to five years with ₹10 lakh fine. Similarly, service providers’ fine was one crore with a ban for four years.
The proposed legislation increases the minimum jail term to five years from three, and the fine to ₹5 crore from ₹2 crore for any director, senior management or the persons in-charge of the service provider firm who are found guilty during the investigation.
For organised crime resulting to paper leaks, a person or a group of persons shall be punished with a minimum jail term of seven years which may extend to ten years and they have to pay a fine of ₹10 crore.
Minister for DoPT Jitendra Singh, who is also the government interlocutor along with union health minister JP Nadda, is set to introduce the bill in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
The statement of objects of the bill said, “In recent years, there have been some incidents of question paper leakages and malpractices in examinations conducted by public examination authorities, which tend to affect the transparency and fairness of the public examinations system. Hence, in order to further strengthen the fairness, to enhance the credibility of the public examinations system and to facilitate speedy trial and ensure time bound investigations of offences under the said Act, it is necessary to make amendments in the said Act...”
The proposed bill inserts two new sections— 12A and 12B— for speedy probe and trials. The current bill stipulated investigation by federal agencies. The new bill allows the government to set up a Special Task Force for the same purpose. The new sections add that be it a Central Investigating Agency or a SIT, shall complete the probe “within a period of two months from the date of a reference made to it by the Central Government.”
Making specific provisions for the fast track courts, the bill said, “For the purposes of providing a speedy trial on day-to-day basis, every State Government and Union territory Administration shall, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, by notification, designate a Court of Session, to be a Special Fast Track Court to try offences under this Act.”
It also imposes strict timelines for trial. “In every trial of an offence under this Act, the proceedings shall be continued on day-to-day basis, until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined, unless the Special Fast Track Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, finds that adjournment of the same beyond the following day is necessary: Provided that such trial shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of filing of the chargesheet,” the new provisions of the legislation said.
In a bid to cut down judicial delays, the bill says that an appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Fast Track Court to the High Court and “Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be heard by a bench of two Judges of the High Court and shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal.”
“Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any Court from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of a Special Fast Track Court” and “an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Fast Track Court granting or refusing bail.”
The bill also tightens provisions for appeals. “Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from: Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of thirty days: Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of ninety days,” it said.
It is, however, not clear if the government would manage to pass the legislation as the Opposition, adamant for education minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s ouster, had washed out the first week of the monsoon session. Many Opposition lawmakers have told HT that unless Pradhan resigns, they don’t want to give the government any leeway to debate or discussion students’ related issues.