120+
exam questions leaked before NEET-UG 2026 was cancelled — the second national exam compromise in three years
Every Exam Must Be Secure: Accountability and Reform for National Examinations
On 3 May 2026, over 2.27 million students sat NEET-UG. Nine days later, the NTA itself cancelled the exam after investigators found signs the paper had circulated before the test. The Supreme Court later remarked that, despite its own 2024 directions after the previous leak, the NTA "has not learnt its lesson." The CBI has been explicit that no NTA official or government employee has been found involved — the case instead centres on a retired teacher who worked for the NTA on a freelance, contract basis as a paper-setter. Investigators separately allege the same network compromised the 2025 paper, an allegation still under investigation. Thirteen people remain in judicial custody as the CBI states more arrests are likely. This is the second time in three years a national exam has been compromised.
No fee, no membership, nothing to pay. We are establishing how many people support this before we take it any further.
120–140
questions investigators say overlapped between a leaked guess paper and the real NEET-UG 2026 exam — an investigative finding, not an independently audited figure
source13
people arrested and in judicial custody as the CBI’s investigation continues — the agency says more arrests are likely
source2025 & 2026
the two exam years investigators allege the same network compromised — an allegation under active investigation, not yet a court finding
source11–13
student suicides reported in the specific 46-day window between cancellation and re-test (not to be confused with broader multi-year NEET-suicide figures) — causation is not established, and the government keeps no official data on this
sourceWhy this matters
A second national compromise in three years
NEET-UG was compromised in 2024 and, after reforms followed, cancelled again in 2026 over fresh leak allegations. The 2026 re-test and 16 July results resolved this year’s exam for the students who sat it, but a one-time fix does not by itself address a vulnerability that has now surfaced twice in three years. It is also not the only 2026 examination crisis: CBSE’s new on-screen evaluation system produced widely disputed results the same year, and a separate leak allegation surfaced around the UGC-NET Sociology paper in June. Different exams, different failure points — but the same underlying pattern of examination systems that are not secure or reliable enough for the scale at which they now operate.
The vulnerability was contracted, not official
The CBI has stated plainly that it has found no NTA official or government employee involved. The case instead centres on a retired teacher engaged by the NTA on a freelance, contractual basis to help set the question paper. This does not excuse the institution: an agency remains responsible for vetting and securing everyone it grants exam-setting access to, contractor or not. If anything, relying on under-vetted, unaccountable contract labour for the most sensitive step in the process is itself an institutional failure — arguably a more troubling governance gap than a single rogue official would be, not a lesser one. Investigators separately allege the same network reached the 2025 paper too — an active allegation, not yet established in court.
The human cost is not abstract
In the specific 46 days between the 2026 cancellation and the re-test, national reporting recorded 11–13 student suicides — a figure that itself grew as more cases surfaced, and one the government does not officially track. We do not claim the crisis caused any specific death; suicide is typically multi-causal. We cite this only because prolonged examination uncertainty is a documented risk factor, alongside the ordinary toll of lost time, coaching costs, and stress that any cancellation imposes on millions of families.
Equity is at the centre of this
Unpredictable, high-stakes exams hit hardest the students who can least absorb the shock — those from rural and low-income backgrounds who cannot fall back on repeat attempts or expensive coaching. A secure exam system is a question of equal opportunity, not just logistics.
What Should India Expect from the Next Union Education Minister?
Every time a national exam fails, the easiest reaction is to ask who should be blamed, and who should replace them. That instinct is understandable, but incomplete. An examination system used by tens of millions of students cannot depend on the character of any single office-holder — it has to be built so that it works regardless of who holds the post. The right question is not "who should be minister," but "what should this office demand of whoever holds it, so that institutions like the NTA, UGC and AICTE are strong enough that no single failure, or single person, can compromise them again." That is the spirit of the framework below — a set of qualities any Education Minister should be measured against, independent of party, individual, or moment. A few illustrative examples of public-service careers that touch on these qualities follow in the FAQ below — offered only as illustrations of relevant experience, not as recommendations, endorsements, or suggested appointments. Administrative capability. This portfolio spans NTA, UGC, AICTE, IITs, NITs, and hundreds of central and state universities, serving tens of millions of students and staff. It is not a role for administrative apprenticeship: the scale of failure when things go wrong is measured in millions of disrupted futures, not hundreds — so it demands demonstrated experience running large, complex public institutions before taking office, not while learning on the job. Direct education-sector and examination-governance knowledge. Some of India’s most damaging institutional failures come from decision-makers who understand policy in the abstract but not the operational reality of how an exam is actually set, printed, transported, and secured. A minister who understands the mechanics, not just the politics, of examination administration is better placed to ask the right questions before a crisis, not only respond to one afterward. A track record of implementing reform, not only announcing it. India already has serious, well-designed committee reports on examination reform — the Radhakrishnan Committee among them. The persistent gap has not been a shortage of good recommendations; it has been the distance between a report being written and a report being implemented. This may be the single most important quality on this list, because it is where most reform effort in India has historically been lost. Crisis management under public scrutiny. A cancelled national exam is not a routine administrative event — it is a crisis affecting the plans of millions of families, unfolding in full public view. Leadership here means calm, transparent, decisive response, not defensive messaging. Institutional transparency and accountability. An examination system’s credibility depends on its willingness to publish what went wrong, not only what went right. A minister who treats transparency as routine, not as something extracted only under pressure, builds public trust that outlasts any single controversy. Technological literacy. Modern examination security is now inseparable from cybersecurity: computer-based testing infrastructure, encrypted paper transmission, digital audit trails, and the ability to detect leaked material circulating on the darknet or messaging platforms before exam day. A minister who understands these systems personally, rather than delegating them entirely, can ask sharper questions and hold agencies and vendors to a higher standard. Legal and constitutional awareness. Examination law, service rules, RTI obligations, and the constitutional limits of executive power over autonomous bodies like the NTA and UGC all bear directly on how far reform can go, and how it should be implemented without overreach. Stakeholder coordination. States, universities, student bodies, coaching-sector regulators, and central agencies all have real, sometimes competing interests in how exams are run. Effective reform coordinates all of them toward a shared standard rather than imposing one unilaterally. Long-term institutional vision. The clearest lesson from this crisis is that a fix which lasts only until the next news cycle is not a fix. The right leadership for this office thinks in terms of the decade-long work of building institutions that outlast any one government, rather than headline-driven responses to the moment. None of these qualities are partisan. Every one of them would be exactly as relevant to any party’s appointee, in any year. That is the point: judge the office by what it demands, and hold whoever occupies it to that same standard, consistently, regardless of politics.
What we are asking for
- 1Statutory status for the NTA: a Parliamentary Standing Committee has already recommended this. Move the agency beyond its current status as a registered society to a body with real legal accountability and a fixed-tenure, professionally appointed leadership.
- 2Extend multi-session, computer-based testing — the model already used for JEE Main, where a single leaked paper cannot compromise an entire national cohort in one sitting — to NEET-UG, alongside the CBT transition NTA has already committed to from 2027. Use randomised question banks, not just randomised seating, so no two sessions share an identical paper.
- 3An independent, pre-exam security audit and certification of the entire paper chain — setting, printing, and centre delivery — before every high-stakes exam, including real vetting standards for contracted subject-experts, since the 2026 case originated with a freelance paper-setter, not an NTA employee.
- 4Fully implement and adequately resource the Standing Grievance Redressal Committee the Delhi High Court has already ordered NTA to constitute, extending its mandate explicitly to cover students affected by exam cancellations and leaks, not only individual technical time-loss.
- 5Go beyond the ₹161 crore registration-fee refund NTA has already issued to 11.46 lakh students — a welcome first step that does not cover the larger real cost of a lost preparation year. We ask for a time-bound, means-tested support scheme for students demonstrably affected by the cancellation.
- 6An independent, court-monitored investigation, with its systemic findings — how the paper-setting and vetting process failed — made public once appropriate, without prejudicing the ongoing prosecution of individual accused persons.
- 7Protect student voice: aspirants and protesters raising legitimate concerns about examination integrity deserve dialogue and reform, not intimidation.
- 8Separately, as a matter of democratic accountability rather than a technical reform: we call on the Union Education Minister to accept responsibility for repeated examination failures under his tenure and consider stepping down. This is a demand about political accountability, not a claim about how examination security should be engineered.
Facts & sources
Every number here is checkable
We link the source for each claim and record the date we last verified it. If you find something wrong, tell us and we will correct it in public.
NEET-UG 2026, held 3 May 2026 for over 2.27 million candidates, was cancelled on 12 May 2026 after a guess paper circulating in coaching centres was found to overlap the real exam by 120–140 questions, concentrated in Chemistry, Biology and Physics.
WION News · verified 2026-07-23
The CBI has arrested and continues to hold 13 people in the case; a Delhi court extended their judicial custody to 24 July 2026, and the agency has told the court the investigation is ongoing with more arrests likely. The CBI has separately stated it has found no evidence of any NTA official or government officer’s involvement.
India TV News; Medical Dialogues (CBI statement) · verified 2026-07-23
Investigators allege — an active, unproven claim, not a court finding — that the same network also compromised the 2025 NEET-UG paper, indicating the vulnerability may have operated across two consecutive years.
Multiple news reports, as compiled at Wikipedia — 2026 NEET Controversy · verified 2026-07-23
The re-test was held on 21 June 2026 under tightened security, including Indian Air Force transport of question papers; of the roughly 24.9 lakh candidates registered for it, about 20 lakh appeared. Results were declared on 16 July 2026: the NTA’s own official announcement states 11.21 lakh (1.12 million) candidates qualified, with more than 58% of them women.
National Testing Agency (official statement) · verified 2026-07-23
These figures need careful scoping, as different reports measure different things. Specifically in the 46 days between the 2026 cancellation and the re-test, Hindustan Times initially reported at least 11 student suicides; Outlook later reported 13. Separately, broader analyses put NEET-linked suicides at roughly 93 over the preceding five years and 119 over eight years — figures about long-running exam pressure generally, not this crisis specifically, and should not be conflated with the 46-day count. Suicide is typically multi-causal; neither the cited reports nor this page claim the 2026 crisis was the sole or primary cause of any individual death. The government has told the Lok Sabha it does not maintain official data on student suicides linked to competitive-exam coaching, calling education a state subject — which is why no single authoritative count exists for any of these figures.
Outlook India; India Today (via Medical Dialogues); Careers360 (government’s Lok Sabha statement) · verified 2026-07-23
At a press conference on 15 May 2026, the government acknowledged a "breach in the command chain" over the leak and stated the NTA would move to computer-based testing from the next examination cycle (2027).
PTC News · verified 2026-07-23
The Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act, 2024 came into force on 21 June 2024. Penalties are tiered: up to 3–5 years’ imprisonment and a ₹10 lakh fine for individual offences; 3–10 years and a ₹1 crore fine for complicit senior management of service providers; and 5–10 years with a minimum ₹1 crore fine for organised examination crime. It targets organised malpractice, service providers and colluding officials — not students.
PRS India · verified 2026-07-23
Following the 2026 cancellation, nationwide student-led protests — including a weeks-long hunger strike by an education-reform activist that began 28 June 2026 — called for the Education Minister’s resignation and systemic examination reform.
Wikipedia — 2026 Delhi Jantar Mantar protests · verified 2026-07-23
On 25 May 2026, the Supreme Court itself criticised the National Testing Agency over the cancellation, remarking that despite the Court’s own 2024 directions following the previous leak, "the NTA has not learnt its lesson." This is a judicial observation, on the record, not a media characterisation.
LiveLaw · verified 2026-07-23
2026 was not only a NEET-UG crisis. CBSE’s new On-Screen Marking (OSM) system for Class 12, introduced in February 2026, produced results in May that students said bore no resemblance to their preparation; over 70,433 grievance applications were filed by early June. A cybersecurity researcher had disclosed vulnerabilities in the OSM portal to CERT-In as early as February, which reportedly remained unpatched by May. The board’s chairperson and secretary both lost their positions, and the matter triggered a parliamentary inquiry.
The Week; Outlook India; Wikipedia — 2026 CBSE On-Screen Marking controversy · verified 2026-07-23
A separate, still-unresolved allegation: days after the UGC-NET June 2026 Sociology paper was held on 30 June, reports surfaced that a 100-page paper-setting PDF — material said to be accessible only to the NTA — had circulated beforehand, with around 90 questions matching the actual paper. The Ministry of Education ordered NTA to investigate; no concluded findings had been reported as of this writing.
India TV News; Deccan Herald · verified 2026-07-23
Among those arrested in the NEET-UG 2026 case are two brothers, Dinesh and Mangilal Biwal, held after a joint CBI–Rajasthan SOG operation; investigators allege they procured a guess paper for roughly ₹15 lakh and distributed it in Sikar. Dinesh Biwal had previously served as a district-level office-bearer of the BJP’s youth wing, the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha; the party has stated the accused have no current ties to it. We report both facts together, neutrally — this does not establish any wider political involvement, which is a separate, unproven claim we do not make.
ETV Bharat; The Print; DNA India · verified 2026-07-23
Questions
Is this against the government, the NTA, or exam staff?+
No. This is a call for secure exams and accountability when failures recur. We criticise systems and outcomes, not the many officials and invigilators who do their jobs honestly.
Wasn’t this already fixed with the re-test and results?+
The re-test and the 16 July 2026 results resolved this year’s exam for the students who sat it. They do not fix the underlying vulnerability — investigators found the same insider network had already compromised the 2025 paper too. A one-time re-test is not the same as a secured system.
Why do you call for the Education Minister’s resignation?+
Ministerial accountability for repeated failures under one’s watch is a normal democratic principle, not an accusation of personal wrongdoing. It is also not a novel demand here — opposition MPs and student groups have already made it publicly following the 2026 crisis. We state it as a civic demand, not as a claim that any individual committed a crime.
Do you want to scrap NEET?+
No. We want it conducted securely and fairly. The goal is trustworthy exams and protected opportunity, not fewer exams.
Is this linked to any protest group or political movement?+
No. Aarunya Issues is not affiliated with any protest organisation, and this page reflects only verified facts and our own demands — not any other group’s broader platform. We reference the 2026 student protests as sourced, factual background, not as an endorsement of any organisation involved in them.
How do you make sure your claims are accurate?+
Every factual claim on this page is sourced and dated (see Facts & sources), and we separate verified facts from our own recommendations and opinions, which are labelled as such.
Doesn’t citing the Supreme Court’s criticism of the NTA imply the Court blamed the Education Minister personally?+
No, and we want to be precise about this. The Court’s 25 May 2026 remark that the NTA "has not learnt its lesson" was directed at the agency’s institutional performance, not at any individual minister. Our call for the Minister’s accountability rests separately on the general democratic principle of ministerial responsibility and on political precedent (opposition MPs have made the same demand) — not on the Court’s findings, which we do not stretch to cover something the Court did not say.
Isn’t citing suicide statistics next to a resignation demand emotionally manipulative rather than evidence-based?+
We’ve tried to guard against this specifically: we state clearly that causation is not established, that the government keeps no official data on these deaths, and that suicide is typically multi-causal. We include the figure because examination uncertainty is a documented risk factor worth acknowledging honestly — not to imply any single death was caused by any single decision. If this still reads as exploiting tragedy rather than informing readers, that is a fair criticism to put to us directly.
Why call for the Education Minister’s resignation specifically, rather than the Prime Minister, the NTA’s leadership, or state-level recruitment boards — which historically account for more leaks?+
A fair scope question. This issue is deliberately limited to the national NEET-UG exam and the ministry responsible for it; state-level recruitment-exam integrity is a real, separate problem we have not researched here and don’t make claims about. We name the Education Minister, not the Prime Minister, because ministerial responsibility for a portfolio is the narrower, more defensible democratic-accountability claim — extending it further would be a claim we cannot currently support with evidence.
Has any of the leak or question-overlap evidence been independently audited, or does this rely entirely on investigator and media claims?+
It relies on CBI findings as reported by named news organisations and, where available, official statements (NTA, PIB) — we have not found a published, independent forensic audit of the alleged question overlap. We say this plainly rather than imply a rigour that doesn’t yet exist. If an independent audit is published, we will update this page.
The accused are only arrested, not convicted — how does this page avoid presuming guilt?+
We describe people as arrested or accused, never as guilty, and we deliberately do not repeat the specific alleged conduct attributed to named individuals in CBI filings, since that level of detail isn’t necessary for a civic policy case and carries real risk of prejudging outcomes the courts haven’t reached. Everyone named in connection with this case is entitled to the presumption of innocence unless and until convicted.
Why does this page discuss leadership qualities for the Education Minister role, rather than only the facts of the crisis?+
Because accountability without a positive standard is incomplete. It is easy to say a minister has failed; it is more useful to say clearly what the office should require of whoever holds it next, so the standard outlives this specific crisis and this specific office-holder. See "What Should India Expect from the Next Union Education Minister?" above for the full framework.
Are there real, publicly documented examples of careers that illustrate these qualities?+
Yes — offered only as illustrations of relevant public-service experience, not as recommendations, endorsements, or proposed appointments. Neither person named below has sought this role, been offered it, or endorsed Aarunya Issues or any reform proposed here. We deliberately limit these examples to retired public servants, to avoid the separate problem of naming a currently serving official as an illustrative "example" on a page that also calls for the current Minister’s accountability — that would risk compromising an active officer’s institutional neutrality through no fault of their own. K. Radhakrishnan — e.g., 7th Chairman of ISRO (2009–2014), led India’s first-attempt Mars Orbiter Mission and the Chandrayaan-1 programme; postgraduate in management from IIM Bangalore, PhD from IIT Kharagpur. He currently chairs the government’s own High-Level Committee reforming the NTA — the same reform effort this issue is about. Strong on: large-scale institutional leadership, crisis-driven delivery, technological literacy, and direct, current engagement with this exact mandate. Gap: his career is in space-science institutions, not universities or examination boards specifically. Sanjay Mitra — e.g., 1982-batch IAS officer (West Bengal cadre); 38th Defence Secretary of India (2017–2019); Chief Secretary of West Bengal; Master of Public Administration, Harvard Kennedy School; currently Professor of Practice, School of Public Policy, IIT Delhi. Strong on: senior public-administration experience at the highest level of government, crisis management, and current academic engagement with public-policy questions. Gap: his substantive career is concentrated in defence, infrastructure and general administration, not education specifically. Mr Mitra has not sought this role, has no known connection to Aarunya Issues, and does not endorse this or any other campaign.
How can I use this framework to evaluate any Education Minister myself — now or in future?+
Score any officeholder, past or present, 1 (no evidence) to 5 (extensive, demonstrated record) on each of the ten qualities above: administrative capability, education-sector knowledge, reform implementation, crisis management, transparency, accountability, technological literacy, legal awareness, stakeholder coordination, and long-term institutional vision. This is meant as a citizen tool, applicable to anyone who holds or seeks this office, regardless of party. Aarunya Issues does not score any individual against it on this page — the goal is to keep the public conversation about institutional competence, not personalities.
Where this stands
The whole process, in public
We publish each step as it happens — including the steps where nothing happens.
NEET-UG 2026 held
2026-05-03Over 2.27 million candidates sit the exam across more than 5,400 centres in India and abroad.
Exam cancelled
2026-05-12The NTA voids the exam after a guess paper circulating in Sikar, Rajasthan coaching centres is found to overlap the real paper by 120–140 questions. The CBI takes over the investigation the same day.
Arrests begin
2026-05-18A coaching-institute owner is arrested; over the following days a biology professor, a school headmistress, and others are detained as the CBI traces the network.
Re-test held
2026-06-21The retest is conducted under tightened security, including Indian Air Force transport of question papers.
Nationwide protests intensify
2026-06-28Student-led protests continue at Jantar Mantar and elsewhere; education-reform activist Sonam Wangchuk begins an indefinite hunger strike the same day, demanding accountability and reform.
Re-test results declared
2026-07-16The NTA’s official announcement states 11.21 lakh (1.12 million) candidates qualified, with more than 58% of them women; counselling begins.
Protests turn violent
2026-07-20Over 10,000 protesters attempt to march toward Parliament; police use tear gas and baton charges. Delhi Police report 118 personnel injured and 15–20 government vehicles damaged; hospital sources report around 60 protesters injured, with one hospital alone logging 65 medico-legal cases from both sides by evening. The government has not issued a formal response to the protesters’ demands.
DMRC shut down metro stations
2026-07-22Massive student solidarity protests spread nationwide, forcing the DMRC to shut down 16 central Delhi metro stations to maintain law and order.
The situation remains unresolved
2026-07-23Sonam Wangchuk’s hunger strike, begun on 28 June, has not ended — he has set conditions (no punitive action against 20 July protesters, compensation for affected families, a Parliament debate on accountability) that the government has not yet met. The CBI investigation continues, with judicial custody of the 13 accused extended and further evidentiary steps ongoing. Aarunya Issues will track the investigation’s conclusion, any compensation decided for affected families, and whether computer-based testing is implemented on schedule from 2027.
Assurance by Prime minister
2026-07-23Prime Minister Narendra Modi delivered a late-night video message promising tough action against the paper-leak mafia and announcing the creation of designated fast-track courts.
Sonam Wangchuk officially ended his 26-day hunger strike.
2026-07-24Sonam Wangchuk officially ended his 26-day hunger strike on July 24, 2026, at Medanta Hospital in Gurugram after receiving formal assurances and commitments from Union Ministers J.P. Nadda and Dr. Jitendra Singh. Following extensive negotiations and appeals from dozens of parliamentarians to avert any escalation into unrest, the activist broke his fast when the government agreed to ensure meaningful parliamentary discussions on examination accountability, consider compensation for affected families, and provide assurances against punitive legal actions targeting non-violent young demonstrators.
Action by govt
2026-07-24The government launched an unprecedented administrative crackdown, resulting in the National Testing Agency (NTA) terminating 47 officials linked to exam irregularities, with legal actions initiated against select individuals.
Union cabinet decision
2026-07-24In a decisive response to nationwide student protests, the Union Cabinet, chaired by PM Narendra Modi, approved strict amendments to the Public Examinations Act on 24 July 2026 to eliminate paper leaks . Set for introduction in Parliament on Monday, 27 July, the bill introduces a 5–10 year prison bracket and a ₹10-crore maximum fine for organized exam racketeers, while forcing compromised service providers to pay a ₹1-crore penalty plus the full cost of conducting re-examinations. The law mandates specialized fast-track courts under the Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta, and Madhya Pradesh High Courts to deliver final judgments within five months, strictly targeting institutional insiders and cybercriminals while completely protecting genuine candidates.
DMRC-shutdown metro stops
2026-07-24Central Delhi continued to face disruptions with multiple metro stations shut and security curbs in place around Jantar Mantar and protest zones
Resignation pending
2025-07-25We ask Accountability.
resignation done
2026 -07-25"I hold deep respect for the aspirations, sentiments, and rightful expectations of the youth of this country. Realising the dreams of India's young generation has been the moral resolve of our political and social life. I express my gratitude to Hon'ble Prime Minister for the opportunity given to me to serve the nation under his visionary leadership." "It is my resolve that we will not allow the youth power of the country to be trapped in a web of confusion," "Keeping in mind that anti-national forces should not take advantage of the situation that has arisen at Jantar Mantar and across the country, that the unity of the nation remains intact, that the future of even a single student of India does not get entangled in legal complications, and that our children devote their time to studies and focus on building their careers -- I have submitted my resignation to Hon'ble Prime Minister. Great thanks a lot
Thanks to the youth of india who supported this moment.
2026-07-25Thanks for understanding reality "Keeping in mind that anti-national forces should not take advantage of the situation that has arisen at Jantar Mantar and across the country, that the unity of the nation remains intact".
resignation accepted
2026-07-26New union educational minister of india is Pralhad Joshi
Who is behind this
Aarunya Issues is an initiative of Aarunya Swaraj Party. We are new, we are small, and we would rather say that plainly than pretend otherwise. What we can promise is that every claim we publish is sourced, every number we report is real, and we will publish the outcome of each issue whether or not it goes our way.
Hello, Since I was a child, I have believed that my purpose is to serve my country. As I grew older, I realized that real change does not happen by only discussing problems—it happens when ordinary people come together, raise their voices, and work toward practical solutions. That is why I started Aarunya Issues. This platform is for every student, every worker, every farmer, every researcher, every entrepreneur, every citizen, and especially for those whose voices often go unheard. If you feel that nobody is listening to your concerns, I want you to know that your voice matters here. Our mission is simple: identify real problems, study them honestly, present practical solutions, and build public support for positive change. We believe every issue deserves facts, transparency, respectful discussion, and accountability—not empty promises. Many people ask me: “Is this a political movement?” My answer is simple: Yes. We believe lasting change requires public participation, good governance, and responsible leadership. Our long-term vision is to build a movement that serves people with honesty, integrity, and transparency, and we intend to participate in future elections to take these ideas from public discussion to public policy. But before asking for votes, we want to earn trust through our work, our ideas, and our commitment to solving real problems. This journey is bigger than one person. It belongs to everyone who believes India can do better. If you believe students deserve better opportunities, if you believe public institutions should work better, if you believe every citizen deserves to be heard, then I invite you to stand with us. We are just getting started. Together, let us raise our voices for those who have no voice, stand beside those who are ignored, and work to build an India that is more transparent, more accountable, more compassionate, and full of opportunity for every citizen. The future is not something we wait for. It is something we build—together. Jai Hind. A student from IIT DELHI Founder, Aarunya Issues.
More about Aarunya Swaraj PartyStay connected
We are building this in public. Watch it happen.
Every issue, every representation, every response — posted as it happens. Follow Aarunya Swaraj Party and be part of the record.
