Class X paper leak: Telangana HC allows erroneously accused boy to appear for SSC exam

On April 4, one of the alleged perpetrators in the SSC paper leak case allegedly snatched the question paper from Harish and photographed it
Pic only for representational purpose (Pic credits: Express)
Pic only for representational purpose (Pic credits: Express)

With regards to Class X exam paper leak, the Telangana High Court has allowed an accused boy to appear for the exam. Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Saturday, April 8, 2023, directed the Headmaster of Zilla Parishad High School, Kamalapur to return the hall ticket and allow Dandaboina Harish, a Class X student of the Mahatma Jyotirao Phule Backward Class Welfare Residential Education School, to take the remaining SSC (Secondary School Certificate) exams scheduled for April 10 and 11.


But what was he accused of? 

The court was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Harish and his father, who pleaded that the headmaster, with the assistance of police, removed the boy from the examination centre and seized his hall ticket, making him unable to take further exams. On April 4, one of the alleged perpetrators in the SSC paper leak case allegedly snatched the question paper from Harish and photographed it.

Appearing for the petitioners, counsel Aloori Giridhar Rao told the court that the headmaster violated the Telangana Public Examinations (Prevention of Malpractice and Unfair Means) Act, 1997, by preventing Harish from taking the exams on April 6 and 8 without following the proper procedure, as stated in a report by The New Indian Express. 

Countering this, Government Pleader for School Education submitted that as per an oral report by the Warangal Police Commissioner and a news report, on April 4, an outsider named Shivaji climbed the boundary wall of the examination centre at around 9.45 am and took photographs of the question paper through the window. The question paper was then shared in various WhatsApp groups around at around 9.59 am. After hearing arguments, the court ruled that the petitioner was not accused of malpractice and thus, he was entitled to interim relief.

Related Stories

No stories found.
X
logo
EdexLive
www.edexlive.com