Legislative Crackdown on Exam Fraud Faces Procedural Hurdles and Judicial Backlog

In the wake of public outcry over the 2026 NEET UG paper leak and the subsequent resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, the Lok Sabha passed the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill on July 29, 2026. This legislative update significantly escalates the cost of academic malpractice, raising maximum fines for organized crime syndicates from ₹1 crore to ₹10 crore. Additionally, the window for debarring complicit service providers has doubled from four years to eight.

Stricter Timelines and Enforcement Gaps

The 2026 Amendment introduces a central special task force and mandates that investigations conclude within two months. Despite these rigid timeframes, analysts point to a lack of accountability mechanisms for missed deadlines. Legal researchers at PRS Legislative Research note that unlike the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013 or the SC/ST Act of 1989, this Bill provides no requirement for officers to record written justifications if an inquiry exceeds its allotted time.

Furthermore, the Bill stipulates that trials must reach a verdict within three months of filing a charge sheet. This provision may face legal friction; a 2002 Supreme Court ruling established that prescribed time limits for criminal proceedings are generally not feasible or judicially permissible. The court held that judicial bodies are not required to terminate cases simply because a specific duration has elapsed.

Lessons from Existing Fast Track Systems

To expedite justice, the government plans to designate Courts of Session as Special Fast Track Courts. However, historical data from similar initiatives suggests a difficult path forward. As of April 2026, there were 775 functional Fast Track Special Courts (FTSCs), yet these institutions have carried a backlog exceeding 200,000 cases since 2023. By 2025, that figure climbed to 245,000 pending matters.

• In 2024, over 40% of investigations under comparable laws remained unresolved for more than six months.
• Performance varies wildly by geography; as of August 2025, trial durations for POCSO cases averaged 257 days in Andhra Pradesh compared to 1,717 days in Delhi.
• While FTSCs dispose of cases nearly three times faster than regular courts, they still average fewer than ten case resolutions per month.

Structural Barriers to Speedy Adjudication

The Law Commission has previously identified several bottlenecks that may hinder the new Bill’s effectiveness. These include the frequent absence of accused individuals, failures by police to apprehend absconders, and non-attendance of official witnesses. The problem is often intensified in complex cases involving multiple defendants. Legal proceedings also suffer from frequent adjournments requested by advocates and a lack of robust case management by trial judges.

Ultimately, the impact of the 2026 legislation remains to be seen. The preceding 2024 Act failed to secure a single conviction during its first two years of operation, suggesting that increased penalties alone may not be sufficient to secure the integrity of the national examination system.

Source: The Hindu — National