E-Paper
Delhi high court directs police against arresting Puja Khedkar until August 21
A bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the case against Puja Khedkar primarily seems to be a false representation given in the application form
The Delhi high court on Monday directed police against arresting Puja Khedkar until August 21 in connection with the case registered against her for fraudulently availing additional civil services examination attempts by faking her identity.
The Union Public Services Commission (UPSC) on July 31 cancelled Khedkar’s provisional candidature as a probationary Indian Administrative Service officer and debarred her from all future examinations or selections.
A bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said the case against Khedkar primarily seems to be a false representation given in the application form. “So the representation is a mistake in her name, in her father’s name.. now all this is in her form...where is the question of any other that you require her custody? Whether she has done it alone or in the connivance of others? If there are third parties involved to unearth the conspiracy…”
The court questioned the need for custody to unearth the conspiracy. “The question is, where has she taken the aid of others? She is not in the system. To tamper with the system she has to be in the system. The crime has been committed alone, but can that be a reason to not grant bail?” Justice Prasad told the public prosecutor Naresh Kaushik, who represented the Delhi Police and UPSC.
The high court said the trial court’s order refusing Khedkar goes on to the offence committed. “...holds that the offence has been committed but there is hardly any discussion in the trial court’s order as to why the bail she sought has not been given.”
The court said it does not seem as of now that immediate custody is required. “...the trial court was boggled from the offence which was committed but not as to why bail should not be granted. In the facts of the present case, this court is of the opinion that the petitioner need not be arrested till the next date of hearing [August 21],” said the high court.
It issued a notice to Delhi Police and UPSC asking them to file their response as to why Khedkar’s custody is required to unearth the conspiracy.
Khedkar moved the high court against the trial court’s order refusing her anticipatory bail on August 1. The trial court said her custodial interrogation was required to unearth the conspiracy. It said she not only cheated and defrauded the UPSC but also snatched the lawful rights of eligible aspirants with benchmark disabilities.
The trial court observed that Khedkar hatched a conspiracy in a pre-planned manner. It added she could not have executed the conspiracy without the assistance of some outsider or insider. The court noted that Khedkar’s case may just be the “tip of the iceberg”. It directed the UPSC to strengthen its standard operating procedure to ensure that such an event does not occur in the future.
Kaushik opposed Khedkar’s bail, saying she committed the offence with calculation. “It is a unique case where mental faculties have been abused in a classic manner,” Kaushik said. He added Khedkar was a mastermind who did not commit the offence single-handedly but with the aid of others. “Father and mother are equally involved.”
Khedkar allegedly faked her identity to get more attempts in the examination. She has been charged with the Indian Penal Code’s Sections 420 (cheating), 468 (forgery for cheating), 471 (using as genuine a forged document), and 120B (criminal conspiracy), and under the Information Technology Act, and Rights of Persons with Disability Act.
Khedkar had exhausted all the permissible attempts available for Persons With Benchmark Disability and Other Backward Class candidates (nine attempts) by 2020. She was not eligible to appear for the exam in 2021. Khedkar allegedly changed her name in 2021 and appeared in 2021, 2022, and 2023 by making “incorrect or false statements regarding the number of attempts already availed”.
On July 31, the UPSC cancelled her candidature after Khedkar failed to respond to the UPSC’s notice. UPSC cited an examination of records and said she was found guilty of acting in contravention of the provisions. Khedkar made it difficult to detect the number of attempts she made by allegedly changing her parents’ names.
