The Central Bureau of Investigation has accused experts in chemistry, biology and physics of exploiting their privileged access to examination material before the May 3 test. The allegations form part of a 94-page chargesheet filed against 13 people before a Delhi court, with investigators describing a network involving subject specialists, coaching interests and middlemen.
Those identified as the three NTA subject experts are Prahalad Vithalrao Kulkarni, biology lecturer Manisha Mandhare and physics expert Manisha Sanjay Hawaldar. All three are accused of providing questions to students before the examination. The allegations remain subject to adjudication and none of the accused has been convicted in the case.
Investigators allege the operation was deliberately structured to minimise the creation of electronic evidence. Rather than circulating complete digital copies of the question paper, selected students were allegedly brought into special coaching sessions where questions were dictated and written down by hand.
The method was intended to prevent investigators from finding photographs, PDF files or messages directly connecting the NTA experts with the examination material. Groups of roughly 10 to 15 candidates are alleged to have attended some of the sessions before the test.
The alleged arrangement began to unravel after questions were reconstructed and circulated outside the original group. Investigators contend that Manisha Waghmare, another accused, obtained remembered questions from students who had attended the sessions and helped create a reconstructed paper.
That material allegedly passed through middlemen, including Pune-based Dhananjay Lokhande and Nashik-based Shubham Khairnar, before spreading further. Digital circulation eventually created evidence that investigators were able to trace.
Kulkarni, a retired chemistry lecturer who had been associated with the examination process, was arrested in Pune in May. Investigators have described him as a key source of leaked chemistry material and alleged that his position gave him access to questions before candidates entered examination halls.
Mandhare was arrested after investigators examined the role of experts involved in preparing the biology portion of the paper. She allegedly had access to botany and zoology questions and is accused of conducting special classes for prospective candidates at her Pune residence before the examination.
The chargesheet names 13 accused in all. Besides the three subject experts, investigators have accused coaching operators and intermediaries of obtaining and distributing examination questions. The prosecution case is supported by statements from about 360 witnesses, 422 documents, 43 material exhibits and forensic assessments of digital devices, handwriting and the leaked questions.
Investigators carried out searches at more than 90 locations as the inquiry expanded through Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi and other areas. The examination, originally conducted on May 3, was cancelled after the leak allegations gained credibility. A fresh NEET-UG examination was subsequently conducted on June 21.
Around 22 lakh candidates had appeared for the original examination, magnifying the consequences of any compromise in the question-setting process. NEET determines admission to undergraduate medical programmes, making confidentiality essential to ensuring candidates compete on equal terms.
The investigation has also drawn a distinction between alleged criminal conduct by individual experts and institutional corruption within the NTA. Investigators have so far found no evidence that NTA officials as an institution accepted payments for leaking the examination. They have, however, identified procedural weaknesses that allowed people with legitimate access to confidential material to allegedly misuse it.
The case has intensified scrutiny of how examination setters, translators and subject specialists are selected and monitored. Unlike breaches at printing presses or examination centres, the alleged NEET operation originated among people who were granted authorised access because their expertise was required to prepare the paper.
(IPA Service)
