Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010257692025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6602/2025 SANJIBAN CHAKRABORTY AND 4 ORS S/O.- SUJIT KUMAR CHAKRABORTY, ADDRESS KHUTIKATIA, SHIV MANDIR ROAD, BHULARAM BORA PATH, DIST-NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN -782002. 2: DULMANI DAS D/O ARUN CH. DAS ADDRESS- RUPAHITALI RAHA DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782103. 3: RIJWAN AHMED CHOWDHURY S/O.- FAKHAR UDDIN AHMED ADDRESS- HEKIMPUR BORHAWAR DIST- HOJAI ASSAM PIN -782439. 4: NAZIHA NASRIN D/O.- NAZRUL ISLAM ADDRESS- MADHUPUR NAGAON DIST- NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782003. 5: AFSANA AKHTARA D/O.- ALAM PATUWARY ADDRESS.- MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 PIN- 782104 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006. 2:THE GAUHATI UNIVERSITY TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE GAUHATI UNIVERSITY JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-781014. 3:THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 21 ROUSE AVENUE INSTITUTIONAL AREA NEAR BAL BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110002. 4:THE BAR COUNCIL OF ASSAM NAGALAND MIZORAM ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND SIKKIM TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR OLD HIGH COURT BUILDING LATASIL UZAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-01. 5:THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS GAUHATI UNIVERSITY JALUKBARI GUWAHATI-781014. 6:THE PRINCIPAL NOWGONG LAW COLLEGE HAIBARGAON NAGAON ASSAM PIN -782002 Advocate for the Petitioner : DARAK ULLAH, SABRISH AHMED,MS A HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : SC. FOR BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA, A GOSWAMI(R-3),M DAS Page No.# 3/5 (R-3),MR. P MAHANTA(R-3),MR. P D NAIR (R-4),MR. A CHETRY (R-4),SC, HIGHER EDU,SC, G U,SC. FOR BAR COUNCIL OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 27.03.2026 Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.J. Phukan, learned Standing counsel, Gauhati University appears for respondent Nos.2 and 5 and Mr. A. Chetry, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and Mr. A. Goswami, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 2. By this application filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the arbitrary action on the part of the respondent authorities in withholding the final 10thsemester examination result of the petitioners in course of B.A./LLB of the session 2024-2025. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that they have passed all other semesters with good results, and they finally appeared in the final semester examination of B.A./LLB for the sessions, 2024-2025, and the results were declared on 12th of August 2025. However, the petitioners stated that they came to know from the website of the Gauhati University that their results are stopped, and they were directed to contact the university authorities. As such, the petitioners approached the Principal of the Law College, and they were apprised that external examiner reviewed their practical copies and observed two different handwritings, which led to the action of stopping the results. They were further informed that there was no issue regarding the other subjects and that the said Page No.# 4/5 action was taken only for Paper 10.5 (Moot Court and Internship), for which it is alleged unfair means were adopted by the petitioners. Being aggrieved, the petitioners submitted representations to the authorities concerned, which however was not considered by the authorities. Thereafter, the petitioners forwarded a representation to Gauhati University ventilating their grievances, wherein they had admitted that they had submitted practical papers with two handwritings, and also that there are other students who had submitted papers with two handwritings and they were declared passed. The petitioners have also raised their grievances that before stopping the results, they were not heard. The petitioners also admitted that due to time constraint, they could not complete the 200-pages project and that they had to take help from their family members in writing it down. And that the entire research, analysis and ideas were of their’s. And that the family members had merely assisted in writing. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners who had actually not adopted any unfair means, it is only due to time constraint that they had taken help from the family members were acted harshly upon and that they would lose years and they won't be able to appear in the All India Bar Examination, which would have a disastrous impact on their career. He submits that instead of stopping the results and directing them to reappear in the moot court, other measures could have been adopted by the authorities. 5. Mr. P.J. Phukan, learned counsel for the Gauhati University, submits that the Unfair Means Committee held its meeting on 04.11.2025 and found the unfair means adopted by the petitioners and directed the petitioners to reappear in the paper moot court and internship (10.5) in view of the confession and written admission made by the petitioners that they have taken help from their Page No.# 5/5 parents. However, the respondent authorities have exonerated petitioner No. 2, whose paper although showed two types of handwritings, but those handwritings are of petitioner No. 2 herself. 6. It is seen that the petitioners had admitted in their defence that they have taken help from their parents in writing the 200-page project of moot court and internship. And that those written contents are the results of their own analysis and research, and that parents had only helped in writing the same. This court takes a lenient view, and in the fitness of things, this Court directs that the petitioners be allowed to submit their 200-page project of moot court and internship afresh to the examiners of the Law College, who would consider the said project within a period of 20 (twenty) days and the concerned authorities of the Law college would examine the same and declare the results before the applications are asked for, appearing for the AIB examinations. Further, the Principal of Nagaon Law College would coordinate with the authorities in the university in a said exercise. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant