SC Reduces Penalty For DTU Student Convicted Of Unfair Examination Practices

The Supreme Court has recently sustained the finding of guilt against a Delhi Technological University (DTU) student found to have used unfair means in his 2nd-semester examination.

However, Justices BR Gavai and Sanjay Karol found the punishment imposed on the student to be disproportionate to his actions, leading them to reduce the severity of the penalty.

Yogesh Parihar, an engineering student, will now be allowed to proceed with his studies in the 3rd semester, avoiding a year’s loss. Nevertheless, he will be deemed to have failed his 2nd-semester exam and will be required to retake it.

The Court said in its May 17 order that, “We do not find that the finding of the High Court that the petitioner was guilty of malpractice needs to be interfered, we find that the punishment awarded is disproportionate to the act found to be proved against the petitioner. Therefore, in the fact and circumstances of the case, we reduce the punishment imposed by the High Court upon the petitioner 1 from Category IV to Category II.”

This case emerged when another student was found in possession of a mobile phone containing a WhatsApp group named “Ans,” which facilitated the sharing of answers for examination questions among 22 students. Parihar was identified as a member of this group.

Parihar was stated to be a member of that group.

The Unfair Means Scrutiny Committee of DTU determined that Parihar was aware of his involvement in the WhatsApp group and rejected his claim that his roommate Vatan Tomar used his phone.

Consequently, the Vice-Chancellor of DTU imposed a Category IV punishment on Parihar, resulting in the cancellation of his exams. Furthermore, his registration for the 3rd semester was annulled, and he was required to re-register for the 2nd semester.

In December 2022, the Delhi High Court dismissed Parihar’s petition challenging the DTU decision.

The High Court emphasized that students who resort to “unfair means” during exams and escape punishment can’t contribute to the nation’s development.