Introduction:
"In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India, a Delhi Technological University (DTU) student, Yogesh Parihar, found guilty of using unfair means during his second-semester examination, has been granted a second chance. The court, while upholding the finding of guilt, deemed the punishment imposed by the university as disproportionate and decided to reduce it.

This decision allows Parihar to continue his course in the third semester, without losing a year. However, he will be required to retake the failed second-semester exam."

Background:
The case unfolded when a mobile phone was discovered in possession of another student, containing a WhatsApp group named "Ans." This group was involved in sharing answers to examination questions among 22 students, with Parihar being identified as a member. The DTU's Unfair Means Scrutiny Committee concluded that Parihar had knowledge of his involvement in the group and dismissed his claim that his phone was being used by his roommate.

The Punishment and its Reduction:
Consequently, the Vice-Chancellor of DTU imposed Category IV punishment on Parihar, resulting in the cancellation of his exams. His registration for the third semester was also revoked, necessitating his re-registration for the second semester. However, the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices BR Gavai and Sanjay Karol, found the punishment to be excessive considering the offense committed. In their May 17 order, the court stated that while they did not question the finding of guilt, they believed the punishment to be disproportionate. Therefore, they reduced the punishment from Category IV to Category II.

The Second Chance:
As a result of the Supreme Court's decision, Yogesh Parihar will be allowed to continue his course in the third semester, salvaging his academic progress. Though he will be deemed to have failed in the second-semester exam, he will have the opportunity to reappear for it, giving him a chance to rectify his mistake and regain his academic standing.

Importance of the Ruling:
The Supreme Court's ruling serves as a reminder that while acts of malpractice in exams cannot be condoned, the punishment must be proportionate to the offense committed. By granting Parihar a second chance to redeem himself, the court acknowledges the potential for growth and improvement in students, promoting a fair and balanced approach to discipline.

Conclusion:
The case of Yogesh Parihar v Delhi Technological University highlights the significance of proportionate punishment in educational institutions. The Supreme Court's decision to reduce Parihar's punishment, allowing him to continue his studies in the third semester, provides him with an opportunity to learn from his mistake and make amends. This ruling emphasizes the importance of fairness and rehabilitation in the educational system while maintaining discipline and upholding academic integrity.