The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has alleged that three subject experts engaged by the National Testing Agency (NTA) for NEET-UG 2026 question-paper preparation breached their confidentiality undertakings and allegedly circulated confidential questions before the May 3 examination.
The three accused P V Kulkarni (Chemistry), Manisha Sanjay Havaldar (Physics), and Manisha Gurunath Mandhare (Biology) had legitimate access to question-paper material through their roles in setting, translating or reviewing questions, but the CBI alleges that they used that access to reproduce and pass on questions to intermediaries and students.
The agency’s nearly 20,000-page chargesheet against 13 accused cites 360 witnesses, 422 documents and 43 material objects, with digital-forensic, handwriting and academic-expert reports forming part of its evidence.
The CBI has alleged that the three experts were bound by an “obligation of secrecy” despite signing confidentiality undertakings, and has also pointed to alleged security lapses inside the NTA’s confidential section, including a lack of frisking of experts, inadequate CCTV monitoring and repeated access being given to the same people at different stages of question-paper preparation.
The NTA, meanwhile, had earlier told the Supreme Court that NEET-UG 2026 was conducted under extensive security measures, including biometric authentication, AI-assisted CCTV surveillance and multi-layer frisking, before the May 3 examination was cancelled following inputs of malpractice and referred to the CBI. The re-examination was held on June 21, with results subsequently declared.
The accused remain entitled to the presumption of innocence, and the CBI’s allegations will have to be tested through due process in court. The latest legal development came on August 6, when a Delhi court reserved its order on a plea seeking polygraph, brain-mapping and lie-detector tests for three accused.
Three Experts At Centre
The CBI’s chargesheet has placed three subject experts at the alleged starting point of the NEET-UG 2026 question-paper leak. According to the agency’s case, P V Kulkarni was associated with Chemistry, Manisha Sanjay Havaldar with Physics, and Manisha Gurunath Mandhare with Botany and Zoology.
Their roles gave them access to confidential examination material, but investigators allege that this access was subsequently misused to reproduce questions and circulate them outside the authorised examination process. The allegations are significant because the experts had reportedly signed confidentiality undertakings and were expected to maintain secrecy over the material they handled.
The CBI has invoked provisions relating to criminal conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, besides provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024.
Media reported that the charges invoked against the three could carry severe penalties, including imprisonment of up to life and a fine of up to ₹1 crore, if they are ultimately convicted. The agency has, however, not established guilt merely by filing the chargesheet; the prosecution must still prove its allegations before the court.
The CBI said in its statement accompanying the chargesheet that its investigation had traced the alleged chain from the source of the leaked questions to beneficiary candidates, with digital-forensic analysis, handwriting-expert opinions and academic assessments forming part of the evidence.
According to reports detailing the chargesheet, investigators allege that the experts were provided plain sheets for rough work while working inside the confidential section during translation and back-translation. The CBI’s allegation is that these sheets could subsequently be used to reproduce confidential questions.
In Kulkarni’s case, investigators reportedly allege that he wrote down all 135 Chemistry questions in abbreviated form along with their options, while also memorising some questions before reproducing them outside the secure environment.
Havaldar allegedly noted down Physics questions after returning to her accommodation, while Mandhare allegedly used her familiarity with NCERT textbooks to identify and later reproduce portions corresponding to questions she had encountered.
Investigators have also relied on handwriting analysis in the Physics component: reports cited in coverage of the chargesheet say handwriting on 68 Physics questions recovered during the probe was matched with Havaldar’s handwriting.
The alleged methods differ, but the CBI’s broader contention is that confidential material was reconstructed and converted into information that could be supplied to others before the examination.
From Confidential Section To Candidates
The alleged leak, according to the CBI, did not stop with the three experts. Investigators have described a wider network involving intermediaries, coaching-related individuals and beneficiary candidates. The agency says the investigation involved searches at 92 locations across Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Haryana, Delhi and other states after the FIR was registered on May 12.
The probe involved 72 officers and personnel, supported by eight cyber-forensic experts, and led to the seizure of digital devices, communication records and documents. The CBI has also conducted a money-trail investigation and said that several bank accounts, lockers and a demat account linked to accused persons were frozen.
One of the digital trails investigators reportedly followed involved a WhatsApp group called “Fifa world cup 2026”, which, according to reports based on the chargesheet, had been created by Mandhare in connection with special Biology classes. Investigators allegedly used communications in the group, alongside other digital and residential-security records, to connect individuals with students who attended special classes.
The CBI alleges that Mandhare conducted special Biology sessions in Pune during late 2025 and again in March-April 2026, where students were allegedly directed towards particular portions of their NCERT textbooks and were given questions to note down.
Investigators say several of these questions subsequently matched those appearing in the May 3 NEET paper. A separate WhatsApp group, reportedly called “NEET 2026”, was allegedly used in connection with special Chemistry classes linked to Kulkarni.
The CBI has also alleged that leaked questions were passed through intermediaries and ultimately reached candidates for money. These claims form part of the prosecution case and are yet to be tested at trial.
The scale of the alleged operation becomes clearer when placed against what happened to the examination itself. NEET-UG 2026 was held on May 3, but the NTA cancelled the examination on May 12 after receiving inputs regarding alleged malpractice and after central agencies conducted independent verification.
The NTA had earlier told the Supreme Court that the examination was conducted with a substantial security framework, including Aadhaar-based biometric authentication, AI-assisted CCTV surveillance, mobile jammers, central monitoring and a multi-layer frisking mechanism.
The agency said approximately 1.85 lakh CCTV cameras were deployed across examination halls, strong rooms, biometric counters, entry gates and corridors, while 5,432 centres were covered by the security system. Despite these measures, the examination was cancelled and a re-test was held on June 21.
The NTA’s own affidavit to the Supreme Court had described the cancellation and referral to the CBI as evidence of the seriousness with which it viewed examination integrity.
The contrast has become one of the most important questions emerging from the investigation: while candidates faced stringent checks at examination centres, including biometric verification and frisking, the CBI alleges that the people who had access to the question paper during its preparation were not subjected to comparable security checks.
Investigators have reportedly flagged the absence of frisking when experts entered or exited the NTA’s confidential section, limitations in live CCTV monitoring and the repeated use of the same experts across different stages of question-paper preparation. If proved, these allegations would point to a security weakness occurring much earlier than the examination centre at the point where confidential questions were being created, translated and reviewed.
The Larger Trust Deficit
The NEET-UG 2026 controversy is ultimately about more than a leaked question paper. For millions of students, NEET is a high-stakes gateway to medical education, and the examination process carries enormous personal, financial and emotional consequences for families.
When an exam is cancelled because its integrity is questioned, students who may have spent months or years preparing are forced to repeat the process, while those who believe they were disadvantaged by the leak are left wondering whether their hard work was ever being measured on a level playing field.
The CBI’s chargesheet now provides a detailed account of how investigators believe confidential questions travelled from people entrusted with examination duties to intermediaries and, allegedly, candidates. At the same time, the legal process must remain fair: allegations against the 13 accused cannot become convictions in public discourse before evidence is tested in court. The CBI itself has said its investigation and forensic examination are continuing.
There is also a wider institutional lesson. The NTA has previously told the Supreme Court that it intends to reduce human intervention in question-paper translation, saying AI-based tools could handle at least 85% of translation work to reduce the risk of security compromise.
The Centre has also been considering broader reforms to the NEET format, including a possible shift from the traditional pen-and-paper examination towards a computer-based system, although the government has clarified that no final decision on the format from 2027 has yet been taken.
Meanwhile, the current case is moving through the newly designated fast-track court system. On August 6, a special court in Delhi reserved its order on a plea seeking polygraph, brain-mapping and lie-detector tests for three accused. Separately, concerns about the NTA’s transparency have continued to surface, including recent petitions by candidates alleging discrepancies in their OMR records.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The most important thing this case demands is not another cycle of outrage, blame and social-media speculation, but a serious effort to rebuild trust. If the CBI’s allegations are proved, people entrusted with protecting a national examination appear to have allegedly betrayed that responsibility, and the consequences are borne not by a system or a file, but by students whose futures depend on fairness.
At the same time, every accused person deserves due process, and public anger should never replace evidence or the courts. The focus should now be on making examination systems genuinely secure from the inside out: transparent recruitment and rotation of question setters, strict separation of duties, independent audits, secure handling of rough work, comprehensive monitoring, accountable digital trails and swift action when vulnerabilities are identified.
Also read: CJP Launches Online Petition Urging PM Modi To Address Youth On Education, Jobs And Cost Of Living
