On Wednesday, the Supreme Court granted protection from arrest until February 14 to former IAS probationer Puja Khedkar, who had been accused of cheating and improperly claiming OBC and disability quota benefits in the civil services examination.
A bench comprising Justices B. V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma issued notices to the Delhi government and the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) regarding Khedkar’s request for anticipatory bail. The bench directed, “Issue notice returnable on February 14, 2025. Until the next hearing date, no coercive actions shall be taken against the petitioner.”
During the proceedings, senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Khedkar, contended that the High Court had made strong remarks against her when it dismissed her bail plea. The Supreme Court remarked that Khedkar had not yet faced any punitive actions, stating, “No one had touched her.”
Luthra argued that should the case proceed to trial, it would likely result in a conviction due to the substantial findings made by the High Court. When the Supreme Court inquired about Khedkar’s current situation, Luthra revealed that she had lost her job and was seeking legal recourse.
The court scheduled the next hearing for February 14, 2025. Khedkar is accused of providing false information in her application for the 2022 UPSC civil services examination to benefit from reservation quotas. She has denied all allegations against her.
In dismissing her anticipatory bail request, the High Court established a strong prima facie case against Khedkar and stated that further investigation was necessary to uncover a “larger conspiracy” involving attempts to manipulate the examination system. The court noted that granting bail could be detrimental to this investigation.
“Anticipatory bail plea is dismissed. Interim protection from arrest is vacated,” the High Court concluded. Khedkar had previously been granted interim protection when the court issued notice regarding her bail application on August 12, 2024, which had subsequently been extended.
The High Court emphasized that the UPSC examination is a prestigious evaluation, and this case exemplified fraud against a constitutional entity and the public. The anticipatory bail plea faced opposition from Delhi Police counsel and the complainant, the UPSC. Khedkar’s legal team argued for her cooperation with the investigation, noting that all evidence was documentary in nature, thus indicating that her custody was not necessary. However, the Delhi Police insisted on her custodial interrogation to uncover the potential involvement of others in the case.
The UPSC opposed Khedkar’s bail plea, claiming she had committed fraud against it and the public, asserting that her interrogation was essential to revealing the “magnitude” of the fraud, which they believed required the assistance of others. The commission has initiated various actions against Khedkar, including filing a criminal complaint for allegedly utilizing fraudulent means in the civil services examination, leading to the Delhi Police filing an FIR for several offences.