While the intention behind the Public Examinations Amendment Bill is commendable, the approach raises serious questions about over-criminalization and potential misuse. Harsher penalties alone cannot solve a systemic problem. Paper leaks often occur due to weak administrative protocols, lack of digital security, and corruption within exam bodies. Focusing primarily on punishment diverts attention from these root causes.
The bill makes many offences cognizable and non-bailable, which could lead to arbitrary arrests. Small-time touts or even students caught sharing old question papers might be lumped with organized criminals, facing severe consequences disproportionate to their act. The task force’s powers are not clearly defined, raising fears of centralization that could infringe on state autonomy in education.
Fast-track courts, while desirable, risk compromising the quality of defence, especially for underprivileged accused who cannot afford good lawyers. The pressure to clear cases quickly may lead to convictions without thorough examination of evidence. Moreover, the bill's definition of 'unfair means' is broad and could be interpreted to include minor infractions.
Instead of a purely punitive approach, the government should invest in technology, secure supply chains, and transparent recruitment of exam personnel. A more balanced law would distinguish between serious and minor offences and ensure procedural fairness. The parliamentary committee must address these concerns before the bill becomes law, or else it may create new problems while trying to solve old ones.