New Delhi:

The 2024 NEET-UG – for entrance to undergraduate medical courses – can only be conducted again if the “sanctity” of the test held on May 5 was “lost on a large scale” as a result of leaked questions the Supreme Court said Thursday morning as it heard over 40 petitions asking for a re-test.

The remark was an echo of observations made last week, when the court said the “sanctity” of the examination had been affected and it demanded answers from the authorities. The court then advised petitioners against a re-test and said certain circumstances would argue against that measure.

The court also heard petitions from the under-fire NTA – the National Testing Agency, the central body responsible for the conduct of competitive exams – seeking transfer of cases filed by various state police forces to the respective High Courts to avoid potential duplication and confusion.

“You have to show us that the leak was systematic… that it affected the entire examination… so as to warrant cancellation of the entire exam…” a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said, “Merely because, of 23 lakh (students) only one lakh will get admission… we cannot order a re-examination.”

“Second, tell us what should be the direction of the investigation in this matter.”

“If we accept your wider submission (that leaked question papers compromised the exam results) we would also like your assistance on the lines on which the investigation must happen.”

The court also pointed out it may be unfeasible to identify and “segregate” the hundreds, or thousands, of students who may have conspired to access questions beforehand.

‘1.08 Lakh vs 24 Lakh’ Question

On the numbers of petitioners – seen as crucial to establish the strength of petitions seeking cancellation – the NTA responded, “There are 131 not within the 1.08 lakh (students selected for admission to private colleges) who want a re-test and there are 254 who are opposing the re-test.”

The question of data and how to analyse this data was an early bone of contention, with senior advocate Narender Hooda, for the petitioners, complaining of a “handicap”.

“I am starting with a handicap. I do not have the results… because of that I cannot have the data analytics,” he told the court, as he also pointed out a possible conflict of interest. He said, “One of the Directors of IIT Madras is a member of the governing body of the NTA…”

Appearing for the agency, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered quickly. “This is factually wrong. Somebody else was…” he said, and explained, “Governing body has no role in conduct of exam.”

On IIT Madras’ Data Analysis

Returning to the question of analytics, Mr Hooda argued it would be difficult to establish variances given a data set as large as all students who took the exam, i.e., nearly 24 lakh. The NTA, in a written submission to the court last night, said data analysed by IIT Madras showed mark distribution followed a bell-shaped curve normal to any large-scale examination, and indicated no abnormality.

READ | Why So Many NEET-UG Toppers? Exam Body’s Reply In Court

The report also acknowledged the “overall increase in marks obtained… specifically in the range of 550 to 720… across cities and centres” and attributed it to a “25 per cent reduction in syllabus”.

Mr Hooda, however, said that report was based on the figure of nearly 24 lakh and that the analysis should have been carried out on the 1.08 lakh students who passed the examination.

“Data analytics was run for 23 lakh students… but at what stage, if 10,000 or 20,000 (cheated) can you detect abnormality? The correct procedure was to apply this to 1.08 lakh…”

“The (bell-shape) curve is no indication there is no abnormality because the data is too large… which cannot be caught. Granular variations can’t be seen with this large data…” he insisted.

100 Toppers

Mr Hooda also demanded the NTA release data for the top 100 ranks and not just the top 17; the IIT Madras report showed a city-wise list, which showed the maximum (five) came from Bengaluru, with four from Lucknow and three each from Kota in Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu’s Namakkal.

The Chief Justice subsequently read out the list of top 100 students, which showed there were nine toppers from Rajasthan alone and six from Bahadurgarh in Haryana.

Mr Hooda pointed out what he said was an anomaly, but the NTA said the list’s purpose “is to show toppers are spread over… that there is no abnormal spike in any particular centre.”

NEET-UG Controversy

Controversy over the 2024 NEET-UG exam – attended by nearly 24 lakh aspiring medical professionals – broke last month after allegations the question paper had been leaked – subsequent inquiries indicated the leak was orchestrated by a national ‘solver gang’ network – on social media.

The first red flags were the unusually high number of perfect scores; a record 67 students, including six from one coaching centre, scored a maximum 720. Questions were also asked over the award of ‘grace marks’ – not exam protocol, according to the authorities – to 1,563 students.

In an affidavit filed last week, the government, referring to the analysis by IIT Madras insisted there is no indication of “mass malpractice” nor evidence that some candidates had benefitted from cheating.

READ | CBI Arrests ‘Rocky’, Alleged Mastermind In NEET-UG Paper Leak Case

The CBI has been tasked with investigating this case and has filed six cases and arrested nine people so far. Last week Rakesh Ranjan, alias Rocky, who is seen as one of the ringleaders, was arrested.

The incident also triggered a political row, with the Congress-led opposition attacking the ruling BJP in Parliament, forcing ruckus and chaos as MPs debated the Motion of Thanks to President Droupadi Murmu’s joint address.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

New Delhi:

The Rouse Avenue court on Friday granted bail to one Gangadhar Gunde whose counsel claimed that he was wrongly arrested by the CBI due to mistaken identity in an NEET paper case linked to Latur, Maharashtra.

CBI had arrested the accused Gunde on June 26 from Dehradun. This case was initially registered by the Latur Police at Shivaji Nagar Police Station. Later on, the FIR was taken over by the CBI.

Special CBI judge Ankit Singla granted bail to Gangadhar Gunde after hearing arguments of counsel for CBI and the accused.

He has been granted bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs 25,000 and a surety bond of the same amount.

Advocate Kailash More counsel for Gangadhar Rangnath Gunde argued that Gunde had been arrested by the CBI on June 26 from Dehradun due to mistaken identity. He is not the actual man for whom CBI was looking for.

It was also submitted that an FIR was lodged by the CBI about the NEET UG exam 2024 against a person whose name is also Gangadhar but the full name was not revealed. N Gangadhar Appa Nanjuthappa was arrested by the CBI later on.

CBI had lodged the case against unknown persons. N Gangadhar Appa Nanjuthappa has been arrested in Bengaluru.

Advocate More also submitted that Gangadhar Gunde’s name surfaced during the investigation as he met one Sanjay Tukaram Jadhav on October 2.

Gunde met him in Osmanabad about his daughter’s matrimonial dispute at her in-law’s house. There Gunde and Jadhav exchanged their mobile numbers. Gunde made a call to Jadhav on October 3, the bail plea stated.

On the other hand, the counsel for the CBI disputed the submissions of the defence counsel. She argued that one suspect Irenna Konagalwar is on the run and only knows who is actual Gangadhar agency was looking for. So as far now, it can’t be said with surety that the present accused is not the same Gangadhar agency was looking for.

Relying upon the statement of arrested teachers Sanjay Tukaram Jadhav and Jalil Umar Khan Pathan, CBI submitted that Konagalwar knew Gangadhar.

She further pointed out that they have arrested another accused N Gangadhar Appa Nanjuthappa. It was also submitted that the mobile number CBI had was being used by Gunde. Jadhav and Gunde had a conversation.

CBI counsel also submitted that Gangadhar has been arrested in the initial FIR registered on June 23, 2024. His name surfaced during the interrogation of Sanjay Tukaram Jadhav and Jalil Umar Khan Pathan, the FIR named the accused persons.

Counsel for CBI submitted in the court that Gandhar has been arrested on the basis of complaint given by the Inspector ATS Maharashtra police against four persons including Gangadhar. The Complaint had his name and his number and he is Delhi Delhi-based person.

Another man N Gangadhar Nanjuthappa also has been arrested.

One accused namely Irenna Konagalwar is on the run, only he can identify who is real Gangadhar, the agency looking for, CBI counsel submitted.

It was also submitted that Gangadhar’s phone CDR is also awaited.

While referring to the conspiracy aspects the CBI counsel submitted that Jadhav and Pathan were contacting and collecting initial token money and admit cards from the NEET Aspirants. They were sending the same to Irenna Konagalwar who in turn gave it to Gangadhar who lives in Delhi to get their marks increased.

It is also submitted that Gunde was arrested on the intervening night of June 25 and 26 in Dehradun in one of the five cases registered by the CBI. He was produced before the Rouse Avenue Court on June 27 and was remanded to CBI custody till June 30. Thereafter he was sent to judicial custody on July 12.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)