Supreme Court Asks BCI To Allow Visually Challenged Students To Give Answers In Computer For All India Bar Exam

The Supreme Court today (December 11) warned that if the 5 visually impaired law students, who wish to appear in the upcoming All India Bar Examination scheduled on December 22, are not given adequate facility to answer the questions on a Word document on the computer, it will not let the exam take place. The Court warned the Bar Council of India, the organising body, of contempt action in case of any violation of the direction.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing the plea of three law students who wanted to appear for the Common Law Entrance Test (CLAT)- Postgraduate exam 2024-25, and AIBE respectively.

Petitioner no.1 is a 90 percent low-vision disabled law graduate from NALSAR University of Law, who requested accommodation from the Bar Council of India (Respondent no. 2) to appear for the AIBE-XIX examination to use a computer during the exam.

Petitioner no. 2 is a 100 percent blind law student at Government Law School, Mumbai, who requested that the CLAT conducting body allow the use of computer and clarify the scribe eligibility criteria for students with visual disabilities. Petitioner no. 3 is a 100 percent blind law graduate from Auro University, Surat, who has similarly been requesting access to soft copies of Bare Acts and the use of a computer for the AIBE-XIX exam.

While the Court as an interim relief allowed scribe assistance to Petitioner 1, the issue with the AIBE was that the two petitioners wanted to give the exams on the computer along with a softcopy of Bare Acts and the availability of JAWS (Job Access With Speech) screen reader at the BCI's expense and that they may be allowed to carry their keyboards. All these prayers were allowed as per the order dated December 5. However, the counsel for BCI, AOR Akshay Amritanshu, insisted on taking instructions on the relief seekin permission to give answers on computer.

Today, when the matter came up, Amritanshu reiterated that it would not be possible to allow visually impaired students to take exams on the computer as the AIBE exam is offline paper. Advocate for petitioners, Rahul Bajaj, clarified that this is not a matter of 'online v. offline' exam because the petitioners are simply asking them if they may be allowed to use WORD Document on the computer to give exams.

However, Amritanshu insisted that BCI may not be in a position to do so. The Court again reiterated its earlier order that all arrangements shall be made. After the order was passed in open court, BCI's counsel again mentioned the matter just before the bench was about to rise for lunch.

He informed that he has instructions that the BCI is willing to conduct separate exam, a week later, for the visually impaired students. He submitted that the exam paper would only open on the day of exam and it would be therefore difficult to allow the petitioners to appear online.

To this, Bajaj clarified that they do not have an online exam. The petitioners simply want to give answers on a Word Document available on computer. As for the paper, a softcopy in pendrive could be given to them.

Justice Kant responded: "After it is open[question paper] and it is distributed, then you give them the softcopy. That will take 10-15 minutes. Give them 15 minutes extra time. What is the problem?...We will stop you from holding this examination. Then you are in contempt to hold this exam."

Case Details: YASH DODANI AND ORS. v UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.., W.P.(C) No. 785/2024

Appearances: Advocate Rahul Bajaj, AOR Sanchita Ain, Taha Bin Tasneem, and Habib.