Has India Improved Under Modi? A Data-Based Scorecard
A source-first assessment of the economy, infrastructure, jobs, education, democracy and Uttar Pradesh — and what the NEET-UG 2026 leak, the Cockroach Janta Party and Sonam Wangchuk reveal about accountability.
India has clearly improved in infrastructure, digital state capacity, poverty reduction and global visibility. Its record is mixed or weak on high-quality jobs, examination integrity, political transparency and institutional accountability.
India under Modi: a 10-sector evidence scorecard
This is an editorial evidence score, not an official index. Ten areas receive equal weight. Each score considers measurable outcomes, scale, government attribution, equity, accountability and evidence quality.
The clearest achievement is an execution-oriented state that builds visible infrastructure and operates digital systems at exceptional scale. The central weakness is that the same decisiveness is not consistently matched by transparent responsibility when a system fails.
How should a democratic grievance be judged?
A problem does not need to resemble a war or humanitarian catastrophe before citizens are justified in raising it. The better test is measurable harm, responsibility and remedy.
Material harm
Did people lose money, time, safety, opportunity, liberty or access to a lawful entitlement?
Scale
How many people were directly and indirectly affected?
State responsibility
Was the failure preventable, and which institution controlled the relevant system?
Evidence strength
Is the claim supported by official records, court findings or independently verified reporting?
Proportionate demand
Does the proposed remedy address the failure, or is it mainly a political slogan?
Movement integrity
Are leadership, finance and decision-making transparent?
The correct distinction is not “comfortable citizen versus suffering citizen.” It is “evidence-based grievance versus ideologically amplified claim.”
A salaried or comfortable person can still raise a valid question about corruption, due process, an examination or democratic accountability. Equally, a viral grievance can be exaggerated even when the person sharing it is sincere.
Was the paper genuinely leaked?
Yes. The existence of a serious compromise is supported by the government’s own investigation releases, not merely by protesters or social-media channels.
NTA describes a high-security examination
Approximately 22.79 lakh candidates were registered across 551 Indian cities and 14 cities outside India. NTA described sealed handling, GPS-tracked transport, police escort, CCTV and biometric verification.[1]
NEET-UG 2026 is conducted
The nationwide medical entrance examination takes place.
Chemistry insider arrested
The CBI alleges that questions and correct answers dictated to selected students before the examination matched the actual Chemistry paper, and that students were mobilised through middlemen for several lakh rupees.[2]
NTA-appointed Biology expert arrested
The CBI alleges that an expert with access to Botany and Zoology papers dictated questions in advance, a majority of which matched the examination.[3]
This passes the “real problem” test: measurable financial and academic harm, a preventable system failure, a clearly identifiable public authority and a direct effect on access to medical education.
NTA or Dharmendra Pradhan: where does responsibility sit?
The argument that NTA holds direct operational responsibility is correct. The conclusion that the Education Ministry therefore carries none is not.
NTA describes itself as an autonomous testing organisation created by the Ministry of Education. Its governing structure includes a chairperson, director general and officials responsible for the organisation’s examination system.[6][7]
Alleged criminals
Investigation, prosecution and recovery of illegal gains.
NTA experts and officials
Suspension where justified, disciplinary inquiry and an audit of question-paper access.
NTA leadership
A public explanation and responsibility for governance, segregation of duties and audit controls.
Education Ministry
Disclosure of oversight failures, reform deadlines and answers before Parliament.
Education Minister
Political responsibility proportionate to evidence of negligence, deception or repeated systemic failure.
The evidence proves a serious failure under the ministry’s jurisdiction. As of the research cut-off, it does not prove that the minister personally caused or knowingly concealed the leak. A demand for an independent inquiry and structural reform is strongly justified. A claim that resignation is the only legitimate remedy requires a stronger showing of ministerial conduct.
What is the Cockroach Janta Party, and is its protest legitimate?
The CJP describes itself as an independent satirical and civic-engagement project founded by Abhijeet Dipke. Reporting traces its rise to May 2026 and wider frustration about unemployment, examinations and education.[44][8]
Its publicly reported education demands include accountability for examination irregularities, the Education Minister’s resignation, compensation or relief for affected students and families, timely results and wider examination reform.[45][46]
What is legitimate
- The underlying examination-security failure is independently established.
- Students are entitled to demand transparent responsibility and reform.
- Compensation and protection of merit are legitimate policy questions.
- Peaceful protest is a normal democratic corrective.
What CJP still needs to disclose
- Its complete legal status, constitution and decision-making structure.
- Donation, spending and event-finance disclosures.
- Who formally invites speakers and represents the movement.
- Whether resignation is the primary objective or one part of a measurable reform programme.
What exactly did Sonam Wangchuk do?
Wangchuk joined the campaign and undertook a prolonged hunger strike. Reporting said he would end it if the government accepted responsibility or political leaders assured him that the issues would be raised in Parliament and education reform pursued. He was moved to hospital after medical concerns, against his wishes, during the fast.[8][47]
His involvement gave the campaign national credibility and visibility. It does not prove that he endorsed every participant, photograph, slogan or historical association linked online to the protest.
After the 20 July march, CJP representatives met J.P. Nadda and submitted demands, but reported receiving no firm commitment at that stage.[48]
Are the main pro-government explanations supported?
The claim does not define its period, examinations, level of government or evidentiary threshold. India has no standardised public database that permits a clean party-wise count across Union and state board, recruitment and entrance examinations.
Even if the historical number were proved, it would establish that earlier governments also failed and may have escaped adequate accountability. It would not make the present failure irrelevant.
NEP 2020 promotes the mother tongue, home language, local language or regional language in early education.[18] That policy predates Pradhan’s tenure and cannot be attributed to him alone.
NCERT material has changed historical emphasis. Current Class VIII material still discusses Mughal power and separately gives substantial treatment to the Marathas; therefore “Mughal history was removed” is too broad.[19][20]
A section on the Emergency was introduced at the Class IX level in 2026, while the Emergency had already been covered in senior-school political science.[21]
No evidence reviewed establishes that CJP or Wangchuk is demanding the minister’s resignation primarily because of curriculum reform. Their publicly reported demands focus on the examination failure and education accountability.
NTA holds direct operational responsibility, but ministerial accountability is political by design in a parliamentary system. The question is whether the evidence justifies that remedy, not whether the demand is political.
Which viral claims are facts, and which are association-based conclusions?
| Claim | Evidence-based verdict |
|---|---|
| Afzal Guru was involved in the Parliament attack conspiracy. | Supported The Supreme Court upheld his conviction based on the evidentiary chain.[10] |
| The televised confession proves the case. | Misleading The Court stated that it attached no weight or credibility to the police-arranged media interview.[10] |
| Umar Khalid helped organise the 2016 JNU event. | Supported His organisational role is documented by the JNU inquiry.[11] |
| Umar Khalid personally shouted every viral slogan attributed to him. | Not conclusive A Delhi inquiry found exact attribution difficult, identified outsiders and noted doctored videos.[12][13] |
| S.Q.R. Ilyas is Umar Khalid’s father and was a SIMI office-bearer. | Supported Reliable reporting identifies him as a former SIMI president.[16] |
| S.Q.R. Ilyas founded SIMI. | Not supported The reliable material reviewed supports former office-bearer, not founder. |
| SIMI directly created PFI. | Oversimplified Tribunal material describes PFI as a merger of regional organisations with important SIMI-linked leaders.[14] |
| PFI is legally designated a terrorist organisation. | Legally imprecise PFI was banned as an unlawful association; the Home Ministry separately lists terrorist organisations.[14][15] |
| A direct PFI–Taliban organisational relationship is proven. | Not established Official material includes serious allegations involving proscribed groups, but the specific direct Taliban claim was not established by the sources reviewed. |
| Both of Atishi’s parents wrote to free Afzal Guru. | Too broad Reporting supports a narrower claim involving her mother and opposition to the execution; the exact original document matters.[17] |
| A controversial person appearing at the protest proves control of CJP. | Association, not proof Presence or acquaintance does not establish finance, leadership, strategy or control. |
A video can contain several accurate biographical facts and still reach an unsupported overall conclusion.
The legitimate question is whether a person funded, organised, advised or controlled the movement. A photograph or family relationship can justify investigation; it cannot substitute for the missing organisational link.
Has India genuinely improved since 2014?
Yes, materially and visibly in several sectors. The improvement is neither universal nor wholly attributable to one party.
Where the evidence is strongest
Where the development story remains incomplete
- Job quality: the PLFS usual-status unemployment rate was about 3.1%, but youth unemployment remained near 10%, and self-employment and informal work dominate.[27]
- Education: enrolment is near universal and foundational learning recovered after the pandemic, but examination integrity and the transition from degrees to productive work remain weak.[22]
- Healthcare: household out-of-pocket expenditure fell but still represented about 43% of total health expenditure in 2022-23.[33]
- Political transparency: the Supreme Court invalidated the Electoral Bond Scheme, finding that non-disclosure of political funding violated the right to information.[36]
- Parliamentary scrutiny: PRS found that 35% of bills in the 17th Lok Sabha were passed with less than one hour of discussion and only 16% were referred to committees.[34]
Is the present government objectively better?
The evidence supports a differentiated answer rather than a single party slogan.
| Area | Evidence-based comparison |
|---|---|
| Infrastructure execution | Current era stronger. Highway expansion, railway electrification pace, airports and public-capital execution show a clear post-2014 acceleration.[29][30][31] |
| Digital public infrastructure | Both continuity and acceleration. UIDAI was constituted in 2009, while UPI launched in 2016 and scaled dramatically thereafter. The architecture spans governments; integration and mass adoption accelerated under the current one.[49][50][32] |
| Economic growth | No simple winner. India experienced high-growth years under both UPA and NDA, and the post-2014 period includes demonetisation, GST transition and the pandemic. The current government’s strongest economic distinction is sustained public-capital and digital execution, not an uncontested monopoly on high GDP growth.[28][26] |
| Poverty and basic services | Long-run progress with substantial recent gains. Poverty reduction and access improvements are cumulative, but current delivery systems helped extend scale and reduce transaction friction.[25][28] |
| Global visibility | Current era stronger in political projection. India’s structural rise spans decades, but the present government has converted size and growth into more visible leader-level diplomacy and agenda-setting.[42][43] |
| Jobs, education integrity and health | No government has solved them. These remain structural weaknesses cutting across party eras.[27][22][33] |
| Institutional transparency | Mixed with serious current concerns. Competitive elections remain real, but political-finance secrecy and reduced legislative scrutiny weaken the record.[36][34][35] |
The current government’s advantage is most convincing where citizens can physically see or digitally use the result. Its advantage is much less convincing where success depends on independent institutions, human capital and transparent accountability.
Is India more visible and consequential internationally?
Yes. The World Bank notes that India’s economy and share of global output expanded substantially over the long run, a rise spanning multiple governments.[28] The current government deserves credit for converting those structural advantages into greater political visibility, strategic partnerships and leader-level diplomacy.
India’s G20 presidency produced a consensus New Delhi declaration, and the African Union became a permanent G20 member — both meaningful diplomatic outcomes.[42][43]
However, global visibility is not the same as complete strategic success. Border tensions, import dependence, trade imbalances, neighbourhood instability and the need for stronger manufacturing remain. India’s rise is real; attributing all of it to one government is not.
Has Uttar Pradesh transformed under Yogi Adityanath?
Significant progress is supported. Complete transformation is not.
The case for transformation
UP budget documents show nominal GSDP rising from approximately ₹14.76 lakh crore in 2017-18 to ₹29.78 lakh crore in 2024-25. Major expressway corridors, higher capital outlay and investment promotion have changed travel times, land economics and commercial geography.[39][40]
This provides a credible mechanism for ground-level observations such as rising peri-urban land prices, stronger legacy businesses, increased tourism and more valuable commercial locations. Those effects can be real without proving that every village or household benefited equally.
The limits
NITI Aayog’s state report found UP’s real GSDP growth averaged about 5.3% from 2012-13 to 2021-22, slightly below the national average, and per-capita income remained around half the national level. Health and nutrition indicators also lagged national averages.[38]
Large MoU totals must be separated from realised investment: signed intent, land allocation, construction, commercial operation and actual employment are different stages.
Many residents report stronger police visibility and less street-level intimidation. At the same time, reported police-encounter deaths raise serious due-process questions and require independent scrutiny.[41]
Are Gen Z and millennials criticising the wrong issues?
Social platforms reward moral certainty, anger, selective history, guilt by association and instant demands for resignation. That distortion affects pro-government and anti-government creators alike.
But personal comfort does not disqualify citizenship. A person does not need to experience war or hunger before questioning examination integrity, corruption, policing or political finance. Democracies are meant to correct failures before they become catastrophes.
| Claim or reaction | Assessment |
|---|---|
| NEET-UG 2026 is a genuine public problem. | Yes Official evidence establishes the compromise and nationwide re-examination. |
| Every participant or celebrity supporting the movement is well-informed. | No Support can be fashionable, ideological or poorly researched. |
| Every protest supporter is anti-national. | No That requires evidence of unlawful objective or control, not selected photographs. |
| India’s development is only propaganda. | No The infrastructure and digital transformation is measurable. |
| Infrastructure success answers the examination failure. | No It is irrelevant to the specific accountability question. |
| The overall national direction is mixed but more positive than negative. | Supported Development indicators are strong, while institutional and human-capital weaknesses remain. |
What can each side honestly claim?
A serious government supporter can say
- India’s infrastructure acceleration is measurable and exceptional.
- Poverty declined substantially, although it remains important at a higher poverty line.
- Digital payments and delivery systems increased state capacity.
- India became more visible and strategically consequential.
- NTA and alleged insiders carry direct operational responsibility.
- A ministerial resignation should require evidence proportionate to that remedy.
- CJP should disclose its structure, finance and decision-making.
A serious critic can say
- The government’s own releases establish a major examination-security failure.
- Elaborate safeguards failed against trusted insiders.
- Millions of honest candidates had to repeat the test.
- Criminal arrests do not substitute for institutional responsibility.
- Job quality and examination competition make youth anger understandable.
- Political-finance secrecy and weak legislative scrutiny are legitimate concerns.
- Development cannot be used to answer an unrelated failure of due process or accountability.
Is India moving in the right direction?
Overall, yes — but not evenly and not without serious correctives.
India has made advances too large to dismiss: highways, railway electrification, airports, digital payments, poverty reduction, public-delivery capacity and international visibility. These changes explain why people returning after several years often perceive a more connected and ambitious country.
The country’s next stage cannot be built through construction and centralised execution alone. It requires trustworthy examinations, productive jobs, stronger schools and hospitals, transparent political finance, parliamentary scrutiny, due process and institutions willing to admit failure.
The CJP movement and Sonam Wangchuk are right to treat examination integrity as a serious issue. They are not automatically right about every remedy, alliance or slogan. The government is right to investigate criminal actors and scrutinise movement transparency. It is not right if those questions are used to avoid explaining how a nationally administered examination was compromised.
India is developmentally advancing and globally rising, but institutionally uneven and still failing too many young people where education is supposed to become opportunity.
A mature democracy appreciates real development and demands real accountability at the same time.
Frequently asked questions
Was the NEET-UG 2026 paper actually leaked?
Did 22.79 lakh students receive leaked questions?
Who is responsible: NTA or the Education Minister?
Why did the Cockroach Janta Party emerge?
What did Sonam Wangchuk demand?
Was Mughal history removed from NCERT textbooks?
Has India improved under Modi?
Has Uttar Pradesh transformed under Yogi Adityanath?
How the scores were assigned
- Outcome: Did measurable conditions improve or deteriorate?
- Scale: How many people benefited or suffered?
- Attribution: How confidently can the result be linked to the government?
- Efficiency: Was the outcome achieved at reasonable financial and social cost?
- Equity: Were gains broad or concentrated?
- Accountability: Did institutions accept responsibility for failure?
- Evidence confidence: How strong and comparable are the available sources?
The score is an editorial synthesis. It should be updated when new official data, court findings or investigation records become available. Social-media content was used only to identify public claims, never as proof.
Linked source register
Official records and primary material are prioritised. Interested-party statements are attributed, and allegations are not presented as convictions.
- National Testing Agency, NEET-UG 2026 scale and security arrangements, 2 May 2026
- Press Information Bureau / CBI, Chemistry-paper investigation and arrest, 15 May 2026
- Press Information Bureau / CBI, Biology-paper investigation and NTA-appointed expert, 16 May 2026
- National Testing Agency, NEET-UG 2026 re-examination notice
- National Testing Agency, more than 20 lakh candidates sat the 21 June re-examination
- National Testing Agency, Governing Body
- National Testing Agency, About NTA
- Reuters, CJP protest, government talks and Sonam Wangchuk, 20 July 2026
- Associated Press, police and CJP supporters clash near Parliament, 20 July 2026
- Supreme Court judgment concerning the 2001 Parliament attack and Afzal Guru
- JNU High-Level Enquiry Committee report
- Delhi Government District Magistrate fact-finding report concerning the JNU event
- Indian Express, inquiry findings and doctored JNU videos
- UAPA Tribunal order concerning PFI
- Ministry of Home Affairs, banned organisations and legal classifications
- Indian Express, S.Q.R. Ilyas, Umar Khalid and SIMI background
- Moneycontrol, Atishi-family allegation, letter and response
- National Education Policy 2020, Ministry of Education
- NCERT Class VIII, Reshaping India’s Political Map
- NCERT Class VIII, The Rise of the Marathas
- Times of India, Class IX NCERT section on the Emergency, 2026
- ASER 2024, national findings
- MoSPI, provisional GDP estimates for FY 2025-26
- IMF, World Economic Outlook Update, July 2026
- World Bank, India poverty trends and methodology, 2011-12 to 2022-23
- World Bank, India Country Economic Memorandum: Becoming a High-Income Economy in a Generation
- MoSPI, Periodic Labour Force Survey Annual Report 2025
- World Bank, India country overview
- Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Year End Review 2025
- Indian Railways, electrification progress to November 2025
- Government of India, civil-aviation expansion and airports
- NPCI, UPI product statistics
- National Health Accounts Estimates for India 2022-23
- PRS Legislative Research, Functioning of the 17th Lok Sabha
- International IDEA, Democracy Tracker: India
- Supreme Court of India, Electoral Bonds judgment and disclosure order
- Transparency International, India: Corruption Perceptions Index 2025
- NITI Aayog, A Macro and Fiscal Landscape of Uttar Pradesh
- Government of Uttar Pradesh, Budget 2026-27 highlights
- Invest UP, economic and infrastructure information
- NDTV, Uttar Pradesh Police encounter data for 2025 and since 2018
- Government of India, G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration
- Government of India, African Union’s permanent membership of the G20
- Cockroach Janta Party official website — self-description and founder
- New Indian Express — CJP education manifesto and protest demands, 11 June 2026
- New Indian Express — CJP protest demands accountability, resignation and compensation, 22 June 2026
- Reuters — Sonam Wangchuk moved to hospital during hunger strike, 18 July 2026
- Times of India — CJP delegation submitted three demands to J.P. Nadda, 20 July 2026
- UIDAI / Parliament record — UIDAI was constituted in January 2009
- NPCI — UPI pilot launched on 11 April 2016