Supreme Court extends protection from arrest of former IAS probationer Puja Khedkar
The Supreme Court on Friday extended former IAS probationer Puja Khedkar’s protection from arrest until March 17. She is facing allegations of cheating and improperly claiming benefits under the Other Backward Classes (OBC) and disability quota in the civil services examination.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma directed Khedkar to fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
During the proceedings, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S V Raju requested additional time to file a response in the case. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Khedkar, argued that law enforcement had not yet summoned her for questioning, and she was willing to appear for investigation. Taking note of this, the Supreme Court instructed the ASG to submit a reply within three weeks.
Previously, on January 15, the apex court issued notices to both the Delhi government and the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) regarding Khedkar’s petition for anticipatory bail.
Khedkar stands accused of providing false information in her application for the 2022 UPSC Civil Services Examination to take advantage of reservation benefits. She has categorically denied all allegations against her.
The Delhi High Court, while rejecting her plea for anticipatory bail, found a strong prima facie case against her. It emphasized that a thorough investigation was necessary to uncover a “larger conspiracy” aimed at manipulating the system. The court stated that granting her bail at this stage would negatively impact the investigation. “The anticipatory bail plea is dismissed. Interim protection from arrest is vacated,” the court ruled.
Initially, Khedkar was granted interim protection from arrest when the high court issued a notice on her bail plea on August 12, 2024. This protection has been extended multiple times.
In its observations, the high court underscored that the UPSC Civil Services Examination is one of the most esteemed competitive exams in the country and described Khedkar’s case as a clear instance of fraud perpetrated against both a constitutional body and society at large.
The anticipatory bail plea was opposed by legal representatives from the Delhi Police and the UPSC. Delhi Police insisted on Khedkar’s custodial interrogation, arguing that it was essential to determine the extent of other individuals’ involvement in the case. The UPSC contended that Khedkar had committed fraud against both the commission and the public, emphasizing the need for custodial interrogation to uncover the full scope of the alleged malpractice.
Following the allegations, the UPSC took several actions against Khedkar, including filing a criminal complaint. Delhi Police subsequently registered an FIR under various legal provisions, initiating formal proceedings in the matter.
