Ethics · 18 Jul 2026

NEET paper leak presumption of innocence

Consider the following statements regarding the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak case:

  1. A Delhi court permitted the accused to appear for the re-examination on the ground that bail conditions cannot be turned into punishment.
  2. The National Testing Agency declared the accused's result along with all other candidates, without any differential treatment.
  3. The original NEET-UG exam was cancelled after a paper leak and a re-examination was subsequently conducted.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A1 only
B1 and 3 only
C2 and 3 only
D1, 2 and 3

Tests whether the aspirant can identify a distractor that inverts the central factual tension of the case, rather than merely recalling isolated details.

Subscribe / Login in App →
This question is based on: A Court Let Him Retake NEET in Custody. The NTA Still Won't Release His Score.
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 18 Jul 2026
About this question

Why in news

A Delhi court allowed Yash Yadav, accused of selling leaked NEET-UG papers, to appear for the re-examination, but the NTA withheld his result even as it declared results for other candidates.

Why for UPSC

This tests whether aspirants catch a statement that inverts the central factual tension of the case itself - the NTA's differential treatment is the crux of the story, making it a prime target for a false "no differential treatment" distractor.

Prelims summary

The Delhi court allowed the accused to sit the re-test citing "bail is not punishment," but the NTA withheld only his result while declaring results for all ~22.7 lakh other candidates.

On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.