The Public Examinations Amendment Bill, 2026, proposes changes to the law enacted two years ago after repeated paper leaks exposed weaknesses in the management of competitive examinations. Opposition MPs have submitted 93 amendments, although the government’s numerical strength in the House leaves little prospect of those proposals being accepted unless it agrees to revisions.
The Bill was introduced on July 27 by Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Jitendra Singh. Discussion began after days of disruption linked to protests over examination irregularities and alleged police action against students demanding accountability.
The proposed law raises the punishment for individuals using unfair means from a prison term of between three and five years to between five and 10 years. The maximum fine would rise from ₹10 lakh to ₹50 lakh.
Service providers found responsible for malpractice could face fines of up to ₹5 crore, compared with ₹1 crore under the existing legislation. Their exclusion from public examination work would be doubled from four years to eight years.
Directors, senior managers and other officials of service-provider companies who consent to or facilitate an offence would face a minimum five-year sentence and a ₹5 crore fine. The present law prescribes a minimum sentence of three years and a fine of ₹1 crore.
The sharpest increase applies to organised crime involving examination authorities, service providers, institutions or other groups. The minimum prison term would rise from five to seven years, while the minimum financial penalty would increase tenfold to ₹10 crore. The maximum term would remain 10 years.
The legislation also permits the Centre to constitute a special task force to investigate offences. Investigations conducted by police officers, central agencies or such a task force would have to be completed within two months.
Every state and Union territory would be required to designate a Court of Session as a Special Fast Track Court after consulting the chief justice of the relevant High Court. Trials would proceed from day to day and would ordinarily have to be completed within three months of the filing of a chargesheet.
Pending cases would be transferred to the designated courts, which would also hear connected offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita or other applicable laws. States and Union territories would appoint special public prosecutors for the cases.
Appeals against judgments, sentences, bail decisions and other qualifying orders would be heard by a two-judge High Court bench. The Bill envisages disposal within three months of admission, although that deadline is framed as an objective rather than an absolute requirement.
The government has presented the amendments as a deterrent against organised networks that obtain question papers, manipulate computer systems, impersonate candidates or collude with examination personnel. Singh told the House that fraud affecting young people’s careers could not be treated as an ordinary offence and argued that investigations and prosecutions needed firm deadlines.
Opposition speakers said increased penalties would not by themselves repair weaknesses in examination administration. They sought clearer responsibility for officials overseeing testing bodies, independent scrutiny of major failures and compensation for candidates whose academic plans are disrupted by cancellations and retests.
Several MPs also questioned whether the proposed two-month investigation deadline would be achievable without additional trained personnel, forensic capacity and coordination between states. Complex cases often involve encrypted communications, payments routed through multiple accounts and networks operating across several jurisdictions.
The debate follows the cancellation of the 2026 National Eligibility cum Entrance Test for undergraduate medical admissions after allegations that the question paper had been compromised. The examination, involving about two million candidates, was conducted again the following month, deepening pressure on the government to demonstrate that examination integrity could be restored.
The 2024 law covers tests conducted by bodies including the Union Public Service Commission, Staff Selection Commission, Railway Recruitment Boards, Institute of Banking Personnel Selection and National Testing Agency, along with examinations held by central ministries and notified authorities.
(IPA Service)
