Supreme Court Rejects Plea Seeking Probe into Alleged CLAT 2026 Paper Leak

The Supreme Court of India has refused to hear a petition that asked for a court-monitored investigation into allegations that the CLAT 2026 question paper was leaked before the exam.

A Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe said the petition was filed too late, especially since the exam had already been conducted.

The Court pointed out that the petitioners claimed the paper was leaked on December 6, but they approached the Court only on December 16. The Bench observed that if the issue had been raised before the results, the Court might have considered it more seriously.

Although the petitioners clarified that they were not asking for the exam to be reconducted, the Court still declined to entertain the plea.

What were the allegations?

The petition was filed by a group of law aspirants who claimed that images, videos, and answer keys of the CLAT 2026 paper were circulating on WhatsApp and Telegram before the exam.

According to them:

• Some posts had timestamps from the night before the exam
• Certain messages allegedly offered access to the paper in exchange for money
• The material did not show any “edited” tag, suggesting it may not have been altered later

They argued that this showed the paper was leaked around 15 hours before the exam, which destroyed the fairness of the test.

Why did the petitioners approach the Court?

The aspirants argued that the alleged leak:

• Compromised the sanctity of the exam
• Gave an unfair advantage to some candidates
• Affected thousands of genuine students, especially those from SC, OBC and economically weaker sections

They also raised concerns that the Consortium of National Law Universities, which conducts CLAT, had not released any clear findings despite setting up a grievance redressal committee headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice MR Shah.

What did the petition seek?

The petitioners requested the Supreme Court to:

• Appoint an independent committee or agency
• Verify whether the leaked materials were genuine
• Identify how the leak happened
• Fix accountability if wrongdoing was found

They also argued that proceeding with counselling and seat allotment, which was scheduled to begin on January 7, would cause irreversible harm to deserving candidates.

Final outcome

The Supreme Court rejected the plea, mainly because it was filed after the exam had already taken place, and refused to order any investigation at this stage.