In win for CBSE, Karnataka high court restores punishment against B’luru student

Bengaluru: Karnataka high court has restored punishment recommended by CBSE against a Class 12 student of a Bengaluru school who carried a mobile phone into exam hall, holding that even mere possession of a mobile phone attracts a stringent penalty under the revised CBSE guidelines.The student was found carrying a mobile phone 25 minutes after the physical education paper began during Class 12 board exam in Feb 2025. After the phone was detected, a fresh question paper was given to the student and he completed the exam. He was allowed to appear for the remaining papers.Following an inquiry, CBSE, on May 28, 2025, directed the school to cancel the student's current as well as next year's examinations in all subjects for use of unfair means (UFM) in accordance with the amended guidelines.The student claimed he had arrived late to the exam and entered the classroom in a hurry, unknowingly carrying a phone. The phone went unnoticed even during frisking. He contended the device did not contain any material related to the examination, which was verified by the inquiry committee.The committee had recommended punishment under Category 3 of the earlier guidelines, which prescribed a comparatively lesser penalty. However, CBSE imposed punishment under the revised Category 3 guidelines with stricter action.HC's single bench, on August 23, 2025, ruled in favour of the student, and CBSE filed an appeal.The bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonacha noted that during CBSE's 139th governing body meeting on June 24, 2024, the board had accepted the examination committee's recommendation to modify the guidelines governing the use of mobile phones during board examinations.Earlier guidelines treated possession of copying material, including a mobile phone, under Category 1 with a relatively lenient view. Following the amendment, even mere possession of a mobile phone was placed under Category 3, which prescribes a stringent penalty.The bench noted that reading down a provision specifically moved from Category 1 to Category 3 by the governing body would not be appropriate in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the bench allowed the writ appeal filed by the CBSE and its controller of examinations and restored the punishment imposed on the student.