The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended the interim protection from arrest granted to former IAS probationary officer Puja Khedkar, who is accused of using fake OBC and disability certificates to appear for the UPSC Civil Services Examination.
Court Questions Delay In Investigation
During the hearing, the Court questioned why the Delhi Police had not yet completed the investigation, especially since Khedkar had stated in an affidavit that she was willing to cooperate.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma was hearing Khedkar’s anticipatory bail plea. In January, she was granted temporary protection from arrest.
Custodial Interrogation
Representing the Delhi Police, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju argued that custodial interrogation was necessary to uncover a larger scam involving fake documents submitted by UPSC candidates.
Justice Sharma questioned what difference custodial interrogation would make compared to regular questioning.
Raju explained that Khedkar was entitled to nine attempts at the UPSC exam based on her OBC and disability status. However, she allegedly exceeded this limit by forging documents and changing her name. He added that custodial interrogation was needed to identify the middlemen involved in issuing fake certificates.
Case Insights
Raju further stated that investigators suspect a wider scam involving fraudulent certificates and need to determine whether Khedkar’s case was isolated or part of a bigger network.
Justice Sharma responded that if there was a larger scam, the authorities should investigate it but pointed out that Khedkar herself was not responsible for issuing fake certificates.
Justice Nagarathna emphasized that while it was necessary to identify the source of the allegedly forged certificates, this did not necessarily require Khedkar to be taken into custody.
Khedkar’s Defense
Khedkar’s lawyer argued that she had been diagnosed with a low-vision disability only in 2018 and had attempted the UPSC exam three times since then. Therefore, she had not exceeded her allowed attempts as a disabled candidate.
Her lawyer further explained that she had been taking the UPSC exam since 2012 but was officially recognized as having a 40% disability in 2018, which entitled her to nine attempts.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
