Bansuri Swaraj, a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of Parliament, defended the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026, on Tuesday.

The legislation aims to dismantle organized fraud networks that compromise national examinations, a move intended to restore integrity to the competitive testing system.

Speaking during a Lok Sabha debate in New Delhi, Swaraj said opposition parties are displaying "selective outrage" [1] regarding the issue of paper leaks. She said the government is taking decisive action to ensure that "no exam paper will leak" [2].

To deter future fraud, the 2026 amendment introduces severe financial penalties. The bill proposes a maximum penalty of ₹10 crore [3] for organized paper-leak syndicates. Swaraj said these measures are designed to target the financial incentives that drive such criminal enterprises.

Beyond fines, the legislation focuses on the speed of the judicial process. The bill outlines the implementation of fast-track trials for paper-leak cases, with a goal of concluding these proceedings within three months [4]. This acceleration is intended to provide swift justice to affected students, and a deterrent to perpetrators.

Swaraj also highlighted the creation of investigative task forces to identify and neutralize leak networks before exams occur. During her speech, she utilized contemporary phrasing to connect with younger audiences, noting that "Modi ji clocked it" [5] in reference to the Prime Minister's approach to the crisis.

The BJP MP said the opposition's criticism ignores the systemic improvements being made to the examination infrastructure. By combining heavy fines with rapid prosecution, the government intends to eliminate the culture of impunity surrounding academic fraud.

“"selective outrage"”

The 2026 Amendment Bill represents a shift toward treating examination leaks as organized crime rather than simple administrative failures. By introducing high-value fines and strict three-month trial windows, the Indian government is attempting to create a high-risk environment for syndicates, potentially shifting the cost-benefit analysis for those engaging in academic fraud.