The Delhi High Court quashed the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) order that had cancelled the candidature of a Doctor and debarred her from appearing in NBEMS exams for two years on allegations of using unfair means during her diploma final examination in Radio Diagnosis.
Justice Vikas Mahajan held that the penalty imposed on the petitioner was based on no evidence, terming the findings of NBEMS’ Examination Ethics Committee as perverse and in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court directed NBEMS to declare her result for both theory and practical components of the June 2024 examination within two weeks.
The petitioner, an MBBS graduate from Lady Hardinge Medical College, was accused of concealing chits under her answer booklet and allegedly swallowing them when confronted. She was also accused of threatening exam officials the following day. These allegations formed the basis for NBEMS’s October 29, 2024, order canceling her candidature and barring her for two years.
However, upon reviewing the CCTV footage from the examination centre twice, including in open court, the Court found no visual evidence of the petitioner engaging in the alleged conduct. Contrary to NBEMS’s claim that her seat was not visible due to a pillar obstruction, the footage from camera angle Cam-05 clearly showed her desk and did not support the allegation of swallowing any material.
The Court observed that NBEMS had not provided the petitioner with the CCTV footage, the appraisers’ statements, or the full evidence cited in the show-cause notice. Emphasizing that the stigma of cheating carries serious civil consequences, the Court held that denial of access to these materials constituted a breach of natural justice.
Referring to Poonam Jain vs. Union of India 2017 SCC OnLine Del 8872 , the Court reiterated that while courts generally exercise restraint in disciplinary matters, interference is warranted where conclusions are unsupported by evidence or where procedural fairness is compromised.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the debarment order and allowed the petitioner to proceed with the results of her examination.
Appearances:Â
Petitioner: Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Priya Mittal and Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Advs
Respondent: Mr. Sunil J. Mathews, Ms. Jyoti Chib and Ms. Yashika Singh, Advs.
