Whether a State High Court is legally bound to quash FIRs registered against students protesting a public examination paper leak, when such protest constitutes exercise of fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b).
Aaj is legal awareness debate ka motion hai: 'State High Court Must Quash FIRs Filed Against Exam-Leak Protesters' — yani kya Rajasthan High Court ko un FIRs ko quash karna chahiye jo exam-leak ke khilaf protest karne wale naagirkon par darj ki gayi hain. Main Nyaya, aaj ki moderator, dono pakshon ko zapne-apne constitutional aur legal arguments rakhne ka mauka dungi — Counsel Aarav, aap pehle apna paksh rakhiye.
My lord, is motion ka seedha sawaal yeh hai — kya un naagirkon par FIR thopna jaayaz hai jo sirf exam-leak ke khilaaf awaaz utha rahe the? The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 ka Section 3 clearly define karta hai ki 'unfair means' kya hota hai — leakage, collusion, tampering — aur is list mein peaceful protest ka koi zikr nahi hai. Jab statute khud protesters ko accused nahi maanta, to unpar darz FIRs ek legal nullity hain aur High Court ko inhe quash karna hi chahiye.
Ref: The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 · Section 3
My lord, main Bina hoon, vipaksh ki taraf se — aur main seedha kehna chahti hoon: protesters ke FIRs quash karna ek khatarnak precedent set karega, kyunki The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 ka Section 9 saaf kehta hai ki is Act ke under saare offences cognizable, non-bailable aur non-compoundable hain — matlab legislature ne khud decide kiya hai ki yeh matters court se bahar compromise nahi ho sakte. Paksh yeh kehta hai ki protesters 'sirf awaaz utha rahe the', lekin jab tak investigation poori nahi hoti, court kaise surety de sakti hai ki koi bhi protesting individual Section 3 ke under defined unfair means — jaise leakage mein collusion ya document tampering — mein involved nahi tha? FIRs quash karna us janch ko hi rok dega jo in students ke liye nyay dilane ka zariya hai.
Ref: The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 · Section 9; The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 · Section 3
My lord, vipaksh yeh bhool raha hai ki protest karne wale log aur exam-leak ke accused — yeh do alag categories hain. The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, Section 3 mein jo 'unfair means' define hain — jaise question paper leakage, collusion, computer network tampering — unka koi bhi element un naagirkon par nahi laagu hota jo sirf apne constitutional haq se sadak par utare the. Isliye, My lord, in protesters par darz FIRs legally unsustainable hain aur High Court ko inhe quash karna chahiye.
Ref: The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 · Section 3
My lord, paksh ne protesters ke adhikar ki baat ki — lekin yeh bhool gaye ki The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 ka Section 9 saaf kehta hai: is Act ke sabhi offences cognizable, non-bailable aur non-compoundable hain — matlab yeh sirf accused exam-cheats ke liye nahi, balki is poore mechanism ki suraksha ke liye bana hai. Ab agar High Court FIRs quash kare bina record dekhe, to woh usi protective mechanism ko kamzor karti hai jo lakhs of genuine aspirants ke liye khadi ki gayi thi. Main yeh maanti hoon ki protest ka adhikar hai — lekin FIR quash karna aur protest ka adhikar dono alag sawal hain, aur dono ko ek saath mix karke High Court ko ek blanket order dene ke liye kehna — yeh judicial overreach bhi hai aur un genuine exam-leak victims ke saath anyay bhi.
Ref: The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 · Section 9
Ek taraf petitioners ka kehna hai ki ye FIRs legitimate protest ko criminalize karti hain aur inhe quash hona chahiye, jabki dusri taraf State ka stand hai ki kanoon-vyavastha aur exam-integrity ki raksha ke liye ye FIRs zaroori thin. Meri balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: High Court ko har FIR ki facts individually examine karni chahiye — jo cases sirf shantipurn assembly ya bhashan tak seemit hain, unhe constitutional protection milni chahiye, lekin jo cases mein actual disruption, property damage ya intimidation alleged hai, unhe mere bulk-quashing se nahi, balki trial ke zariye decide hona chahiye. Main citizens se request karungi ki is debate ko rate karen aur apni raay den.