Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Dec 23: The Delhi High Court on Monday denied anticipatory bail to former probationer IAS officer Puja Khedkar in the criminal case lodged against her for alleged cheating and wrongly availing of OBC and disability quota benefits in the civil services examinations.
The High Court also vacated the interim protection from arrest granted to her who is accused of “misrepresenting and falsifying facts” in her Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) application. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said prima facie a strong case was made out against her.
The court observed that Ms Khedkar was not a fit candidate to avail the benefits meant for disadvantaged groups that she has been availing by forging her documents. The High Court said her moves were part of a large conspiracy to manipulate the system. The court also observed that the investigation would be affected if she was granted an anticipatory bail.
“Anticipatory bail plea is dismissed. Interim protection from arrest is vacated,” Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said while ruling on the plea. Justice Singh said a strong prima facie case was made out against Ms Khedkar and investigation was required to unearth the conspiracy.
It was a classic case of fraud committed on a constitutional body as well as society, the judge said. Ms Khedkar is accused of misrepresenting information in her application for the UPSC Civil Services Examination, 2022, to get reservation benefits. The counsel for the Delhi Police as well as the complainant, the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC), opposed the plea for pre-arrest bail.
The UPSC initiated a series of actions against Ms Khedkar in July, including lodging a criminal case, for availing attempts in the civil services exam by faking her identity. The Delhi Police registered an FIR under provisions of the Indian Penal Code, Information Technology Act and Right of Persons with Disabilities Act.
The court also noted that UPSC is one of the most prestigious examinations in the world and stressed that she had committed fraud not just with the constitutional body but also country at large. Ms Khedkar said she would cooperate in the investigation and claimed that her custody was not needed as all evidence is documentary in form. But the court disagreed.
Ms Khedkar had made headlines earlier this year amid claims that she lied about physical and mental disabilities, and changed her name and surname, as well as forging an OBC certificate, to clear the exam.
The court said her intensions, prima facie, were to dupe authorities and observed “her steps (were) part of a larger conspiracy. Ms Khedkar, it was also observed, is “unfit for appointment.” The charges against her, which include forgery and cheating, are a “classic example of fraud committed not only an authority but also the nation at large”, the court said.
“Conduct of the petitioner was purely driven with a motive to dupe the complainant UPSC and all documents allegedly forged by her were done to reap benefits of schemes meant for the (disadvantaged) groups of the society,” the court said. “The investigation in the present case, as per material available on the record, prima facie reveals the petitioner is not a fit candidate to avail benefits meant for disadvantaged groups…”
In a significant mention, the court also indicated “a high possibility that family members (of Ms Khedkar) may have colluded with unknown powerful persons in order to get the certificates…”, possibly expanding the investigation to include government officials and departments.
The order was passed by a single-judge bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who had earlier granted Ms Khedkar temporary protection from arrest. In her arguments, Ms Khedkar doubled down on physical disability claims – she has a Maharashtra hospital certificate diagnosing her with an “old ACL (anterior cruciate ligament) tear with left knee instability” – and asked, therefore, that only attempts in the ‘divyang’ category be counted.
She also claimed only her middle name had been altered and argued “therefore, there is no truth in the allegation that there has been a major change in my name”. “UPSC verified my identity through biometric data… did not find my documents (to be) fake or incorrect…” she argued.
Ms Khedkar’s bail plea had been opposed both by the Delhi Police and the UPSC, which rejected the argument she be given bail on a promise to cooperate fully and because the material against her was documentary in nature, and therefore her custody was not needed.
The police’s counterargument was that Ms Khedkar’s custody was needed to interrogate her and unearth the involvement of others in the commission of the offence. The cops also said relief to Ms Khedkar could hinder its inquiry into the “deep-rooted conspiracy” behind the alleged crime. The UPSC also argued Ms Khedkar had committed a fraud against the public and that her custody was needed for the cops to unearth a fraud that would have needed help from other individuals.
In early September the union government had sacked Ms Khedkar who has denied all charges against her and claimed she was being targeted since she filed a sexual harassment case against her senior. This was a month after the UPSC cancelled her selection.
Ms Khedkar’s troubles began in June when Pune Collector Suhas Diwase wrote to Maharashtra Chief Secretary Sujata Saunik, flagging the trainee IAS officer’s demands for perks such as a car, staff and an office that she was not entitled to during her two-year probation. Thereafter, Ms Khedkar was transferred to Washim.
Amid the row, her selection for IAS came under the spotlight. It was found that she had availed relaxed criteria for OBC candidates and persons with disabilities. It then came to light that her father, a former Maharashtra government officer, had property to the tune of ₹ 40 crore and she did not qualify for the OBC non-creamy layer tag. It also emerged that she had not appeared for a mandatory health check-up at a government facility to confirm her exemption for disability.
On July 31 this year, the UPSC had cancelled her candidature and imposed a lifetime ban from taking all future examinations and selections of the Commission.