On Thursday, the Delhi High Court extended interim protection for former IAS probationary officer Pooja Khedkar by one week. The Delhi Police is now required to submit a new response to Pooja Khedkar’s counter-affidavit, which was filed yesterday.
![[Breaking] Ex- IAS Trainee Puja Khedkar Won't be Arrested Till Sept 5; Delhi HC Extends One-week Interim Protection](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-44-1.png?resize=300%2C168&ssl=1)
New Delhi: On Thursday(29th Aug), the Delhi High Court granted a one-week extension of interim protection to former IAS probationary officer Pooja Khedkar, until September 5.
Khedkar is accused of submitting fraudulent disability and Other Backward Class (OBC) certificates to pass the civil services exam, and is also alleged to have submitted a mental illness certificate.
Justice Subramonium Prasad of the Delhi High Court has postponed the hearing on suspended IAS officer Pooja Khedkar’s anticipatory bail plea until September 5. This delay was due to the Delhi Police requesting time to review Khedkar’s rejoinder and to file a new status report.
Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala stated that custodial interrogation is necessary to uncover the full extent of the conspiracy and to determine the involvement of other individuals. The judge noted that in the current circumstances, it is not appropriate to grant anticipatory bail.
The court observed that Khedkar is charged under Section 420/468/471/120B IPC, Section 66D of the IT Act, and Sections 89/91 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, for cheating through misrepresentation. The court highlighted that the conspiracy was planned and executed over several years and involved multiple parties.
“The complainant/UPSC has prepared various documents to support the claim of misrepresentation, indicating that the conspiracy was meticulously planned and executed over several years by the applicant/accused,”
the court remarked.
“The applicant/accused could not have carried out the conspiracy alone and likely required assistance from outsiders or insiders. The Delhi Police’s lawyer also noted that the OBC (non-creamy layer) status and benchmark disability claims are under scrutiny and investigation,”
the court observed.
The court further stated,
“As a constitutional body conducting exams for prestigious posts nationwide, UPSC must uphold the highest standards of transparency and fairness in its procedures. It is acknowledged that UPSC’s standard operating procedure (SOP) has been breached by the applicant/accused. This breach suggests a potential systemic issue, as if one individual can bypass UPSC’s scrutiny, others might do the same.”
“To preserve its reputation, fairness, and the integrity of the examination process, UPSC needs to strengthen its SOP to prevent such incidents in the future. UPSC should also review its recent recommendations to identify candidates who may have illegally benefited from additional attempts, OBC status, or benchmark disability benefits,”
the court advised.
“The investigating agency must broaden its investigation scope. It should conduct a thorough and fair investigation to uncover candidates who may have exceeded permissible attempts, unjustly received OBC benefits, or obtained benchmark disability benefits without entitlement. Additionally, the agency should determine if any insiders from UPSC facilitated the applicant’s illegal actions,”
the court directed.
Previously, In her response to the Delhi High Court regarding the UPSC’s allegations, Puja Khedkar argued that once she was selected and appointed as a probationer, the UPSC no longer had the authority to disqualify her.
READ ALSO: IAS Trainee Puja Khedkar|| Delhi Court to Review Anticipatory Bail Plea Tomorrow
Khedkar mentioned,
“DoPT (Department of Personnel and Training) alone can take action under the All India services Act, 1954 and the Probationer Rules as per Rule 19 of the CSE 2022 Rules,”
On July 31, the UPSC revoked Khedkar’s provisional candidature and prohibited her from participating in any future exams or selections. This decision made after Khedkar was found guilty of abusing her powers and violating the CSE (Civil Services Exam) 2022 rules, including allegedly “faking her identity.”
The UPSC also filed a criminal case against Khedkar, accusing her of cheating, fraud, and forgery.
In response, Khedkar filed a petition with the Delhi High Court, challenging the UPSC’s decision to cancel her provisional candidature.
In her court submission, Khedkar denied manipulating or misrepresenting her identity to the UPSC.
Khedkar stated in her response,
“There has been no change in the applicant’s first name or surname from 2012 to 2022, as consistently reflected in all DAFs,”
She further argued,
“The UPSC verified her identity through biometric data (including fingerprints) collected during the personality tests in 2019, 2021, and 2022, and all documents were verified by the Commission during the personality test on 26.05.2022.”
Until 2020-21, Puja Khedkar appeared for the examination under the OBC quota using the name ‘Puja Diliprao Khedkar.’ However, in 2021-22, after exhausting all attempts, she appeared under the OBC and PwBD (Persons with Benchmark Disabilities) quotas, this time using the name ‘Puja Manorama Dilip Khedkar.’ She successfully cleared the exam with a rank of 821.
Puja Khedkar, a 2023-batch IAS officer, faces allegations of fraudulently securing extra attempts in the UPSC examination by manipulating her identity. The accusations include altering her name, her parents’ names, her photograph, signature, email ID, mobile number, and address to deceive the system. The UPSC, upon discovering these discrepancies, lodged a formal complaint with the Delhi Police, leading to the cancellation of her candidature on July 31.
Following the allegations against her, Puja Khedkar‘s probation period suspended, and she was recalled to the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration in Mussoorie, Uttarakhand.
A case has been registered against Khedkar under various sections of the IPC, including 420 (cheating), 464 (making a document in the name of a fictitious person), 465 (forgery), and 471 (using a forged document as genuine).
She is also charged under sections 89 and 91 of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, and section 66D of the Information Technology Act, following a complaint filed by the UPSC.
