Rajasthan High Court Quashes Suspension Of MBBS Students Accused Of Giving NEET For Other Aspirants

Rajasthan High Court granted relief to a bunch of MBBS students who were put under suspension on order of National Medical Commission (“NMC”) owing to FIRs launched against them alleging that they impersonated some other candidates in NEET UG Examination-2023, directing the respective colleges to allow them to attend classes and appear in exams.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta ruled that that in absence of any provision providing power to suspend, rusticate or cancel the admission of the candidates involved in such act, suspension of the petitioners was not only illegal and without jurisdiction but also violative of their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution.

The Court further held that the case against the petitioners was not that they got admission by asking someone else to appear on their behalf, but that they gave the exam impersonating someone else. In such a case, there was no dispute regarding their own merit or eligibility of getting admission in the medical courses, hence, lenient view had to be adopted, with caution.

“If the suspension is allowed to continue, the loss would be irreversible and irreparable, inasmuch as the period which the criminal trial will take, the petitioners would not be able to continue with their studies and their future will be left in lurch. And if, they are ultimately acquitted, they would have lost 3-4 precious years of their student life doing nothing.”

Expressing disapproval towards the act of the petitioners, and noting increasing number of such cases, the Court held that it was high time that the Central Government brought appropriate legislation.

It was argued on behalf of NMC that under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, the body has the power to law down policies for maintaining high quality and standards in medical education.

Further, the counsel submitted that under the Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024, the act of the petitioners fell under the definition of “organized crime” under Section 2(1)(h) as well as under “unfair means” under Section 3 of the Act. Hence, the petitioner could not be allowed to continue their studies.

After hearing the contentions, the Court held that irrespective of NMC's role of maintaining high standards in medical education, or the quoted sections under the 2024 Act, there was no clause with the Act that provided for suspension.

Furthermore, it was held that whether the petitioners would fall under these sections was also something that shall be decided at a later stage in the trial after adducing of evidences. In this light, the Court stated that,

“Hence, unless such finding is recorded and petitioners are held guilty, their future cannot be kept in suspended animation for indefinite period. Had there been a case of the petitioners getting admission in the medical course by asking someone else to appear on their behalf, perhaps this Court would have not granted them any indulgence on the basis of sympathy or equitable consideration, because then their merit or eligibility itself was in doubt. However, so far as their own admission in medical colleges is concerned, there is no iota of allegation of getting admission fraudulently or by using unfair means – there is no quarrel about their merit and eligibility of getting admission in the medical courses.”

The Court expressed its disapproval towards the act of the petitioners, and highlighting the increasing number of such cases, indicated immediate need for the State to bring appropriate legislation. However, it was held that in absence of such legislation, suspending the petitioners was illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of their rights under Articles 19 and 21.

Accordingly, the petitions were allowed, directing the respective colleges to allow the petitioners to attend classes and appear in exams. However, it was ruled that none of the petitioners shall be issued degrees until the trial was concluded and the petitioners were acquitted.

In case of their conviction, NMC was held to be entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law.

Title: Vikas Vishnoi v Controller of Examinations, Rajasthan University of Health Sciences and other connected petitions

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 188

Counsels of Petitioners: Mr. Divik Mathur with Mr. Mayank Rajpurohit; Mr. Saurabh Rajpurohit for Mr. Ramdev Rajpurohit; Mr. Pankaj Choudhary; Mr. Mrinal Khatri and Mr. Naresh Kumar Bishnoi for Mr. S.K. Verma; Mr. Deepak Nehra

Counsels for Respondents: Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG assisted by Ms. Rakhi Choudhary; Mr. Siddharth Tatia for National Medical Commission; Ms. Akshiti Singhvi for Rajasthan University for Health Science

Click Here To Read/Download Order