
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Centre and state governments on a PIL demanding confiscation of movable and immovable property of those accused in examination paper leak cases, including…
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Centre and state governments on a PIL demanding confiscation of movable and immovable property of those accused in examination paper leak cases, including their family members. A bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe issued notice on the plea filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.

Upadhyay told the court he was not pressing his earlier demand for time-bound investigations and trials because the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 has been passed. The PIL also seeks invoking the Prevention of Corruption Act, Money Laundering Act, Benami Property Act and Black Money Act against the accused, and asks that sentences run consecutively rather than concurrently.
The petition argues that repeated failures by authorities to check paper leaks violate students' fundamental rights under Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21, and cause mental trauma, loss of opportunities and rise in student suicides. The court has listed the matter for next hearing on September 25.
Times of India frames the PIL primarily around the court's procedural action and the petitioner's legal demands, while Rediff emphasises the impact on students and the government's anti-paper leak legislation. Both sources underplay the practical difficulty of proving family complicity in such confiscations and the risk of overreach. The measured middle ground is that the court has only issued notice, not endorsed the plea, the real test will be how the government responds and whether the new 2026 Act proves effective without the time-bound trial provisions the PIL originally sought. Watch for the Centre's affidavit due before September 25.
Sources (2): timesofindia.indiatimes.com, rediff.com
This story was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above.
Updated: this story now draws on 2 sources.